<& 


f? 


ERRATA 


PROTESTANT  BIBLE; 


TRUTH   OF  THE   ENGLISH   TRANSLATIONS   EXAMINED; 


IN    A    TREATISE, 

SHOWING  SOME  OF  THE  ERRORS  THAT  ARE  TO  BE  FOUND  IN  THE  ENGLISH  TRANSLATIONS 

OF    THE    SACRED    SCRIPTURES,  USED    BY    PROTESTANTS,  AGAINST    SUCn    POINTS    OF 

RELIGIOUS    DOCTRINE    AS    ARE    THE    SUBJECT    OF    CONTROVERSY    BETWEEN 

THEM     AND     THE     MEMBERS     OF    THE     CATHOLIC     CHURCH  ; 


IN    WHICH    ALSO, 

FROM  THEIR  MISTRANSLATING  THE  TWENTY-THIRD  VERSE  OF  THE  FOURTEENTH  CHAPTER 

OF  THE  ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES,  THE  CONSECRATION  OF  DR.  MATTHEW  PARKER 

THE    FIRST    PROTESTANT     ARCHBISHOP    OF    CANTERBURY, 

IS    OCCASIONALLY    CONSIDERED. 

BY  THOMAS  WARD,  ESQ. 

n 


A  NEW  EDITION,  CAREFULLY  REVISED  AND  CORREC 


TO    WHICH    ARE    ADDED, 

THE    CELEBRATED    PREFACE    OF    THE    REV.    D  OCTORLINGARD 

IN    ANSWER    TO    RYAN'S    "  ANALYSIS, 

AND 

A  VINDICATION,  BY  THE  RIGHT  REV.  DOCTOR  MILNER, 

IN    ANSWER    TO    GRIER'S    "  REPLY." 


"  For  I  testify  to  every  one  that  heareth  the  words  of  the  prophecy  of  this  book  :  If  any  man  shall  add  to  these  things, 
God  shall  add  unto  him  the  plagues  written  in  this  book.  And  if  any  man  shall  take  away  from  the  words  of  the  book  of 
this  prophecy,  God  shall  take  away  his  part  out  of  the  Book  of  Life,  and  out  of  the  Holy  City,  and  from  these  things  which 
are  written  in  this  book."  Revelations  xxii.  18,  19. 


NEW    YORK: 
PUBLISHED    BY    D     &    J.    SADLIER, 

No.  58  GOLD  STREET. 
1847. 


LOAN  STACK 


1 2^7 


TO    THE 


RIGHT    REVEREND    JOHN    FENNELLY, 


VICAR    APOSTOLIC     OF    MADRAS, 


BISHOP    OF    CASTORIA, 


THIS    EDITION    OF  SARD'S    INVALUABLE    WORK, 


AGAINST 


THE    GROSSEST    OF    ALL    CORRUPTIONS, 


THE    CORRUPTION    OF    THE    SACRED    SCRIPTURES, 


u 


MOST    RESPECTFULLY    INSCRIBED, 


AS    A    SMALL    TESTIMONY    OF    THE    HIGH    ESTEEM    AND    VENERATION 


IN    WHICH    HIS    LORDSHIP    IS    HELD, 


BY 


HIS    LORDSHIP  S 


MOST    OBEDIENT    HUMBLE    SERVANTS, 


THE  EDITOR  AND  PUBLISHER. 


25,  Anoleska-street,  Dublin, 
1*<  July,  1841. 


961 


CONTENTS. 


Preface  to  the  Fourth  Edition,  . 

The  Author's  Preface, 

The  Truth  of  Protestant  Translations  of  the  Bible  examined, 

Of  the  Canonical  Books  of  Scripture, 

Of  Books  rejected  by  Protestants  for  Apocryphal, 

Protestant  Translations  against  the  Church, 

"  "  against  the  Blessed  Sacrament  and  Sacrifice  of  the  Mass, 

"  "  against  the  Blessed  Sacrament  and  the  Altar, 

"  "  against  Priests  and  Priesthood, 

"  "  against  Priesthood  and  Holy  Orders, 

"  "  against  the  Authority  of  Priests, 

"  "  against  Episcopal  Authority, 

«  "  against  the  Single  Lives  of  Priests, 

"  "  against  the  Sacrament  of  Baptism, 

"  "  against  Confession  and  the  Sacrament  of  Penance, 

"  "  against  the  Honour  of  our  Blessed  Lady  and  other  Saints, 

'«  "  against  the  Distinction  of  Relative  and  Divine  Worship, 

"  9  against  Sacred  Images, 

"  "  against  the  Use  of  Sacred  Images, 

"  "  against  Limbus  Patrum  and  Purgatory,     ... 

"  "  against  Justification  and  the  Reward  of  Good  Works, 

"  "  against  Merits  and  Meritorious  Works, 

"  "  against  Free  Will, 

"  "  against  Inherent  Justice, 

"  "  in  defence  of  the  Sufficiency  of  Faith  alone, 

"  '*  against  ApOstolical  Traditions, 

"  "  against  the  Sacrament  of  Marriage, 

Protestant  Corruptions  by  adding  to  the  Text 
Considerations  on  the  Lambeth  Records, 
Protestant  Translation  against  the  Perpetual  Sacrifice, 

"         Corruptions  of  the  Scripture, 

"         Absurdities  in  turning  Psalms  into  Metre, 
A  Vindication  of  the  Roman  Catholics, 
A  Vindication  of  Ward's  Errata,  in  Reply  to  Grier,  by  the  Right  Rev.  Dr.  Milner, 


PAGE 

1- 

-14 

15- 

-24 

25- 

-31 

32 

33- 

-39 

40, 

41 

42, 

43 

44, 

45 

46, 

47 

48, 

49 

50, 

51 

52, 

53 

54, 

55 

56, 

57 

58, 

59 

60, 

61 

62, 

63 

64, 

65 

66- 

-69 

70- 

-73 

74, 

75 

76, 

77 

78, 

79 

80, 

81 

82, 

83 

84- 

-86 

87 

88- 

-90 

91- 

-97 

98- 

-101 

102- 

■107 

108- 

-111 

112, 

113 

114- 

■118 

PREFACE  TO  THE  FOURTH  EDITION. 


BY  DR.  LINGARD. 


The  publication  of  Ward's  "  Errata  to  the 
Protestant  Bible"  has  disclosed  a  most  curious 
and  important  fact,  that  the  scriptural  church 
of  England  and  Ireland  was  originally  founded 
on  a  false  translation  of  the  scriptures.  It  was 
the  boast  of  the  first  reformers,  that  they  had 
emancipated  their  disciples  from  the  shackles 
of  Catholic  despotism,  and  had  restored  to  them 
the  freedom  of  the  children  of  God  :  it  now 
appears,  that  this  freedom  consisted  in  reading 
an  erroneous  version  of  the  inspired  writings, 
and  in  venerating  as  the  dictates  of  eternal 
Wisdom  the  blunders  of  ignorant  or  interested 
translators.  "  The  scriptures,"  they  exclaimed, 
"  are  the  sole  rule  of  faith.  Here  they  are,  no 
longer  concealed  under  the  obscurity  of  a 
learned  language,  but  exhibited  to  you  in  your 
native  tongue.  Here  you  will  easily  detect  the 
errors  of  Popery,  and  learn  the  true  doctrine  of 
the  Gospel."  The  credulity  of  multitudes  ac- 
cepted with  joy  the  proffered  boon  ;  the  new 
teachers  were  hailed  as  apostles  commissioned 
by  heaven  ;  and  every  old  woman,  both  male  and 
female,  that  could  read,  became  an  adept,  if 
not  in  the  knowledge  of  the  Bible,  at  least  in 
the  prejudices  and  errors  of  its  translators. 

It  is  not  for  man  to  dispute  the  wisdom  of 
Providence,  and  arraign  at  the  bar  of  his  private 
judgment  the  means  which  God  may  choose  for 
the  diffusion  of  religious  knowledge.  Otherwise, 
I  must  confess,  there  appears  to  me  something 
very  unaccountable  in  the  scriptural  blunders  of 
the  apostles  of  the  reformation.  The  object,  they 
said,  of  their  mission  was  the  dissemination  of 
evangelic  truth.  If  the  Holy  Spirit  selected  them 
for  this  important  office,  he  must  also  have  gifted 
them  with  the  true  knowledge  of  the  scriptures, 
and,  if  he  gifted  them  with  the  true  knowledge 
of  the  scriptures,  it  seems  to  follow  that  he 
ought  also  to  have  granted  them  the  power  to 
make  a  true  translation  of  the  scriptures.  The 
apostles  of  Jesus  received  the  knowledge  of 
tongues,  that  they  might  instruct  the  different 
nations  of  the  earth  :  the  apostles  of  the  church 
of  England  and  Ireland  ought  to  have  received 
the  knowledge  of,  at  least,  the  Hebrew  and 
Greek  tongues,  that  they  might  form  an  accurate 
version  of  the  scriptures.  Such  a  version  was 
as  necessary  to  that  church,  as  the  instructions 
of  the  first  apostles  could  be  to  the  primitive 
churches  of  Christianity.  If  they  were  apostol- 
ical, she  was  scriptural.  However,  without 
speculating  on  the  cause,  the  fact  is  certain,  not 
only   from  the  arguments   of  Ward,  but  even 


from  the  concessions  of  his  adversaries,  that  the 
fathers  of  this  scriptural  church  gave  it  a  version 
of  the  scriptures  abounding  with  errors.  And 
here  it  may  reasonably  be  asked,  whence  arose 
these  errors  ?  Were  they  the  offspring  of  igno- 
rance, or  design  ?  Dr.  Ryan  warmly  contends 
for  the  former,  and  endeavours  to  fortify  his 
opinion  by  the  authority  of  Father  Simon  :  (a) 
but  then,  even  admitting  his  assertions,  devoid 
as  they  are  of  proof,  and  liable  to  objection, 
what  are  we  to  think  of  the  temerity  of  these 
men,  who,  incompetent  to  the  task,  and  con- 
scious of  their  incompetency,  still  presumed  to 
violate  the  purity  of  the  sacred  volumes,  and  to 
obtrude  on  their  unsuspecting  disciples  an  erro- 
neous version  as  the  immaculate  word  of  God, 
and  as  the  sole  and  infallible  guide  to  religious 
truth  ?  Ward,  on  the  contrary,  attempts  to 
show  that  the  more  important  of  their  errors 
were  committed  by  design  ;  and  a  curious  cir- 
cumstance it  is,  highly  corroborative  of  his 
opinion,  that  most  of  their  blunders  are  favour- 
able to  their  own  peculiar  doctrines,  and  unfa- 
vourable to  those  of  their  opponents.  But,  if 
this  be  true,  what  judgment  can  any  unpreju- 
diced man  form  of  these  saints  of  the  reforma- 
tion ?  For  my  part,  I  know  of  no  crime  more 
foul  in  its  own  nature,  more  prejudicial  in  its 
consequences,  more  nearly  allied  to  diabolic 
malignity,  than  that  of  designedly  corrupting  the 
holy  scriptures,  and,  by  such  corruption,  leading 
the  sincere  inquirer  into  error,  and  converting 
the  food  of  life  into  the  poison  of  death. 

But,  from  whatever  source  these  false  ren- 
derings proceeded,  whether  their  authors  were 
guided  by  policy  or  misled  by  ignorance,  this  must 
be  conceded,  that  if  Ward  has  fairly  established 
the  fact,  he  is  entitled  to  the  gratitude  of  the  im- 
partial reader.  The  impartial  reader,  let  him 
be  Protestant  or  Catholic,  will,  if  his  object  be 
truth,  thankfully  receive  the  truth  from  whatever 
hand  may  present  it  to  him.  Hence  it  was  with  no 
small  surprise  that  I  heard  the  clamour  which  was 
raised  against  the  last  edition  of  the  "  Errata." 
In  parliament  and  out  of  parliament,  in  news- 
papers and  pamphlets,  it  was  stigmatized  as  an 
attempt  to  vilify  the  reformation,  and  to  heap 
disgrace  on  the  Established  Church.  "  It  was 
the  work,"  observed  an  eminent  senator,  emi- 
nent for  the  only  talent  he  possesses,  that  of 

(a)  Ryan's  Analysis,  p.  5.  Simon,  however,  in  the  pas- 
sage referred  to,  does  not  speak  of  the  English  translator 
in  particular,  but  of  the  Protestant  translators  in  general. 
This  Dr.  Ryan  has  thought  fit  to  conceal  from  his  readers. 


PREFACE    TO    THE    FOURTH    EDITION. 


religious  calumny,  "  it  was  the  work  of  one 
hundred  and  twenty  Popish  priests  leagued  to 
put  down  Protestantism."  Such  nonsense 
hardly  deserves  notice.  If  facts  are  to  be  hidden 
from  the  eye  of  the  public,  because  they  reflect 
on  the  character  of  our  predecessors,  let  history 
at  once  be  condemned  to  the  flames.  The 
evangelists  did  not  conceal  the  treachery  of  Ju- 
das :  why  should  Protestant  divines  wish  to 
conceal  the  blunders  or  the  frauds  of  the  fathers 
of  their  church  ? 

To  me,  it  appears,  that  none  among  the  ad- 
versaries of  Ward  have  had  the  courage,  or  the 
honesty  to  do  justice  to  that  writer.  His  object 
in  compiling  the  "  Errata,"  was  twofold  :  firstly, 
to  prove  that  the  versions  of  the  scripture  on 
which  the  established  creed  was  originally 
founded,  were  extremely  corrupt :  and  secondly, 
to  show  that  though  many  errors  have  been 
since  corrected,  there  still  remain  many  others 
to  correct.  All  this  however  they  prudently 
overlook  ;  and  by  an  artful  confusion  of  times 
and  persons,  by  referring  to  modern  Bibles  the 
charges  which  he  makes  against  those  of  a  for- 
mer age,  and  by  affecting  to  consider  his  accu- 
sation of  the  clergy  of  Queen  Elizabeth  as 
directed  against  the  clergy  of  the  present  reign, 
they  pretend  to  convict  him  of  misrepresentation 
and  calumny.  In  this,  perhaps,  they  may  act 
wisely  ;  they  certainly  act  unfairly.  Could  they 
have  shown  that  Ward  had.  attributed  to  the 
ancient  English  Bible  errors  *which  it  did  not 
contain,  or  that  he  had  attributed  to  the  present 
Bibles  errors  which  have  been  corrected  in  them, 
they  might  have  substantiated  their  charges 
against  him.  But  this  they  have  not  attempted. 
They  content  themselves  with  exclaiming  that 
many  of  the  former  corruptions  have  been 
corrected,  and  therefore  should  not  have  been 
mentioned.  But  why  should  they  not  ?  The 
very  fact  of  their  having  been  corrected  is  an 
unanswerable  proof  of  Ward's  assertion.  It 
shows  beyond  the  possibility  of  a  doubt,  that  the 
church  of  England,  however  scriptural  it  may 
pretend  to  have  been  in  its  origin,  was  in  reality 
founded  on  a  false  version  of  the  scriptures  ;  a 
version  which  was  a  very  Babel  of  confusion, 
which  spoke  sometimes  the  language  of  God  and 
often  the  language  of  men,  which  had  attempted 
to  improve  the  lessons  of  eternal  truth  by  the 
addition  of  the  whims,  the  ignorance,  the  pre- 
judices, and  the  falsehoods  of  Tyndal,  Coverdale, 
Cranmer,  &c,  &c. 

Among  the  opponents  of  Ward,  the  fiercest 
and  the  only  one  who  has  attempted  a  full  refu- 
tation of  the  "  Errata,"  is  Dr.  Ryan.  His  at- 
tempt is  a  consequence  of  the  grant  of  Ireland 
which  Adrian  IV.  made  to  Henry  II.  Nay, 
start  not,  gentle  reader ;  the  most  important 
events  may  often  be  traced  to  remote  and  almost 
imperceptible  causes.  The  attempt  of  Dr. 
Ryan  is  a  consequence  of  the  grant  of  Ireland 
by  Adrian  IV.  to  Henry  II.  By  that  grant 
the  Ryans  lost  an  extensive  property  ;(a)  and  the 
present  Dr.  is  the  champion  reserved  by  heaven 

(e)  Anal.,  p.  58. 


to  revenge  on  Popery  the  injuries  which  she 
inflicted  on  his  ancestors  six  centuries  ago.  An 
awful  lesson  this  to  the  ambition  of  princes  ! 
But  let  us  see,  how  the  Dr.  proceeds  in  the  work 
of  vengeance.  He  has  divided  his  treatise  into 
different  sections,  corresponding  with  those  of 
the  "  Errata."  In  reviewing  it,  I  shall  follow 
the  same  order. 


PROTESTANT  TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

THE  CHURCH. 

Under  this  head  Ward  has  adduced  no  less 
than  seven  texts  in  which  the  English  translators 
had  substituted  the  word  congregation  for 
church  ;  to  which  Dr.  Ryan  replies,  "  that  the 
former  mistranslations  of  these  seven  texts, 
having  been  corrected  in  the  present  Bible, 
should  have  been  excluded  from  the  catalogue 
of  the  '  Errata.'  "(b)  This  plea  has,  I  trust,  been 
sufficiently  refuted  in  the  preceding  observations. 
That  the  correction  has  taken  place,  is  indeed 
an  improvement  in  the  present  Bible  ;  but  it  is 
at  the  same  time  a  condemnation  of  its  prede- 
cessors. After  the  correction,  Ward  should 
not  have  imputed  these  errors  to  the  corrected 
copies  ;  neither  has  he  done  so  :  he  should  have 
imputed  them  to  the  more  ancient  copies,  and 
in  doing  so,  he  is  justified  by  the  very  concession 
of  his  adversary.  "  But,"  continues  the  Dr., 
"  he  produces  an  eighth  text  to  show  that  we 
have  been  guilty  of  misconstruction  to  injure 
his  church.  In  the  Romish  version  it  is  written  : 
my  dove  is  one ;  (Cant.  xi.  8  :)  in  ours,  my  dove 
is  but  one  ;  a  curious  proof  of  malice  to  his 
church  !  Many  of  his  errata  are  of  this  kind  ; 
frivolous  in  themselves  ;  and  affording  no  proof 
or  but  feeble  proofs  of  the  propositions  he  main- 
tains. "(c)  Now,  readei.  what  canst  thou  infer 
from  this  passage,  but  that  Ward  had  censured 
the  Protestant  version  for  having  adopted  the 
reading,  my  dove  is  but  one  1  The  reverse, 
however,  is  the  truth.  Ward  did  not  censure, 
he  approved  that  reading.  His  censure  was 
levelled  against  the  more  ancient  reading  in  the 
English  Bibles,  my  dove  is  alone.  "  But  this," 
he  adds,  "is  also  amended."  Such  was  the 
candour  of  Ward,  that  he  carefully  pointed  out 
to  his  reader  every  correction.  Of  the  candour 
of  Dr.  Ryan  I  wish  I  could  speak  with  equal 
commendation.  But  he  has  begun  his  analysis 
with  an  artifice,  which  it  will  be  impossible  for 
him  to  palliate,  much  less  to  justify.  He  has 
suppressed  the  real  assertion  of  his  adversary, 
which  he  could  not  controvert,  and  has  substi- 
tuted in  its  place  an  assertion  so  palpably 
absurd  that  it  could  not  fail  to  make  an  impres- 
sion on  the  mind  of  the  uninformed  reader  highly 
prejudicial  to  the  character  of  Ward.  Nor 
has  the  Dr.  left  his  artifice  to  work  its  own 
effect.  He  has  aided  it  by  his  own  observations : 
and  has  of  consequence  charged  the  author  of 


(b)  Ibid.,  p.  11. 


(e)  Ibid. 


PREFACE    TO    THE    FOURTH    EDITION. 


the  "  Errata  "  with  labouring  to  create  disagree- 
ments where  there  was  perfect  harmony ;  and 
wishing  to  widen  instead  of  contracting  the 
breach  between  the  two  churches,  (a)  Such 
is  the  honesty  of  our  biblical  Aristarchus.  But 
if  he  cannot  claim  the  praise  of  honesty,  he  may 
claim  at  least  that  of  consistency.  The  fraud 
with  which  he  has  commenced  his  controversial 
career,  he  has  been  careful  to  repeat  in  every 
stage  of  it.  He  was  fully  aware  that  in  works 
of  the  imagination,  according  to  the  masters  of 
the  art,  perfection  cannot  be  attained,  unless 
character  be  preserved  throughout. 

Serveter  ad  imum, 
Qvalii  rib  incccpto  proccsserit,  et  sibi  constet. 


PROTESTANT    TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

THE   BLESSED    SACRAMENT,   AND 
THE    SACRIFICE    OF   THE    MASS. 

Dr.  Ryan  commences  his  strictures  on  this 
section  by  observing,  that  five  of  the  texts  pro- 
duced by  Ward  having  been  corrected  in  the 
modern  Bibles,  should  have  been  excluded  from 
the  "  Errata."  I  shall  not  fatigue  the  patience 
of  the  reader  by  repeating  what  I  have  already 
said  on  the  subject  of  these  concessions  :  but 
shall  content  myself  with  reminding  him  how 
extremely  corrupt  that  version  must  have  been, 
the  defence  of  which  is  thus  abandoned  by  its 
warmest  advocate.  He  proceeds:  "The  other 
three  texts  have  no  relation  to  the  sacrament 
even  in  his  own  translations,  as  will  appear  by 
exhibiting  them.  Whom  heaven  truly  must  receive 
— let  us  cast  wood  upon  his  bread — -for  he  was 
the  priest  of  the  Most  High.  These  three  texts 
are  thus  rendered  by  us  :  Whom  heaven  must 
receive — let  us  destroy  the  tree  with  the  fruit  there- 
of— and  he  was  the  priest  of  the  Most  High,  (b) 
These  texts  are  no  more  for  or  against  the 
sacrament  than  a  treatise  of  astronomy  :  yet  we 
are  accused  of  misconstruing  them  from  preju- 
dice against  it !"  Softly,  good  Doctor  !  There 
may  be  more  in  some  of  these  texts  than  you 
seem  to  be  aware  of.  Let  us  examine  them 
separately. 

1st.  Whom  heaven  must  receive.  In  exhibit- 
ing this  text,  (to  borrow  the  Doctor's  expres- 
sion,) I  fear  he  has  had  recourse  to  his  favourite 
artifice,  which  I  have  exposed  in  the  preceding 
section.  He  has  suppressed  the  text,  which 
Ward  really  condemns,  and  substituted  in  its 
place  one  which  he  approves.  Ward  did  not 
condemn  the  corrected  reading  of  the  modern 
Bibles,  which  Dr.  Ryan  has  exhibited :  but  he 
condemned  the  corrupted  reading  of  the  ancient 
Bibles,  which  the  Dr.  very  prudently  has  for- 
gotten. That  reading  hath,  whom  heaven  must 
contain ;  a  rendering  which  the  correction,  it 
has  since  received,  sufficiently  proves  to  have 
been  false.  But  Dr.  Ryan,  by  suppressing  it, 
and  substituting  the  corrected  passage,  states 


(a)  Anal.,  p.  11. 


(6)  Ibid.,  p.  12. 


two  advantages  :  he  conceals  the  ancient  corrup- 
tion from  the  eye  of  his  reader,  and  represents 
Ward  as  a  man  of  weak  intellects,  who  could 
thus  refer  to  the  sacrament  a  text  which  has  no 
relation  to  it.  In  the  corrected  copies  I  acknow- 
ledge it  has  not ;  but  in  the  more  ancient  it  had. 
Ward  had  told  us  that  it  Was  so  rendered  by 
Beza,  according  to  that  reformer's  own  confes- 
sion, in  order  to  exclude  the  presence  of  Christ 
from  the  sacrament ;  and  Dr.  Ryan  must  have 
known  that  Protestant  controvertists  in  England 
have  often  alleged  the  same  text  for  the  same 
purpose.     Ward  then  was  perfectly  correct. 

2d.  The  second  passage  is  very  differently  ren- 
dered in  the  Catholic  and  Protestant  versions  :  in 
the  former,    Let  us  cast  wood  upon  his  bread  : 
in  the  latter,  Let  us  destroy  the  tree  with  the 
fruit  thereof.     It  must  be    acknowledged   that 
the  Catholic  rendering  is  not  conformable  to  the 
present  Hebrew :  j»n>a  y?  wnrn».     But  then 
it   is   conformable    to   the   more    ancient    ver- 
sions, the  Greek,  the  Vulgate,  and  the  Arabic, 
and  the  consent  of  these   versions  proves  that 
the  modern  reading  of  the  Hebrew  is  false,  (c) 
The    Protestant   translators,   on  the   contrary, 
:  have  chosen   to  follow  that  reading,  and  accor- 
i  dingly  have  rendered  75  nrrrros,  let  us  destroy 
!  the   tree ;  but  then,   to  make  sense,  they  have 
;  been   compelled  to    give   to    orb    a    meaning, 
:  which,  I  believe,  it  has  not  in  any  other  part  of 
!  scripture,    and    under     -jttr£    the    fruit    thereof 
\  instead    of  his   bread.     Ward,   therefore,    was 
j  justified  in  numbering  this  in  his  catalogue  of 
errata.     If  it  be  asked  why  he  placed  it  under 
the  head  of  false  translations  against  the  sacra- 
ment, he  answers  because  he  suspected  it  to  have 
been  adopted  in  order  to  elude  the  force  of  a 
passage  in  the  works  of  St.  Jerom,  who  had  re- 
ferred the  original  text  to  the  holy  Eucharist,  (d) 
3rd.     The   difference  in  the  third  text,  Gen. 
xiv.  18,  depends  on  the  meaning  which  ought 
to  be  given  to  the  Hebrew  particle  1.     The 
Vulgate  and  the  English  Catholic  version  have 
rendered  it  for  ;  and  that  it  is  susceptible  of  this 
meaning  is   evident  from  the  Protestant  trans- 
lators themselves,  who  in  similar  passages  have 
rendered  it  in  the  same  manner.     (Gen.  xx.  3  : 
Thou  art   but   a  dead  man  for  the  woman  which 
thou  hast    taken  ;    i>3>3  rfrs  mm,    for   she  is  a 
man's  wife.     And   Isaiah  lxiv.   5 :   Behold  thou 
art   wroth,   vx.rrs\  for  we  have    sinned.)     In  the 
present  instance,  they  have    rendered   it   and, 
which  Ward  ascribes  to  their  wish   to  elude  the 
argument  that   Catholic   theologians    had  been 
accustomed  to  draw  from  Melchizedeck's  typical 
sacrifice  of  bread  and  wine. 

Dr.  Ryan  proceeds  to  instance  another  text, 
Avhich,  as  he  vainly  flatters  himself,  will  yield 
him  an  easy  victory.  "  In  the  Protestant  trans- 
lation (Heb.  x.  10,)  it  is  said,  we  are  sanctified 
through  the  offering  of  the  body  of  Jesus  Christ 
once  for  all."  "  Ward  says  that  our  translators 
added  the  words  for  all,  to  take  away  the  daily 
oblation  of  Christ's  body  and  blood  in  the  mass. 

(c)  It  was  probably  nmiDS  in  the  more  ancient  copies. 

(d)  Errata,  No.  II. 


PREFACE    TO    THE    FOURTH    EDITION. 


But  it  must  be  admitted  that  the  compound 
Greek  word,  which  Romanists  render  once  should 
be  rendered  once  for  all ;  only  once  and  for  a 
short  time  :  that  the  words  for  all  are  improperly- 
omitted  in  the  Popish  translations,  and  without 
servingthe  cause  for  which  Catholics  contend. "(a) 
He  is  an  unskilful  or  an  unfortunate  champion, 
who  cannot  aim  a  stroke  at  his  adversary  with- 
out inflicting  a  wound  on  his  friends.  When 
Dr.  Ryan  condemns  the  Catholic,  his  censure 
bears  still  more  heavily  on  the  Protestant  trans- 
lators :  and  he  chooses  to  praise  them  at  the  very 
moment  when  they  condemn  him.  The  Greek 
word  egpocruS  occurs  frequently  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament :  (b)  yet  in  no  one  instance  can  I  discover 
that  the  Protestant  translators  have  rendered  it 
once  for  all,  except  in  this  passage,  Heb.  x.  10. 
If  then,  as  the  Doctor  asserts,  the  words  for  all 
are  improperly  omitted  in  the  Popish  translations, 
I  trust,  he  will  acknowledge  that  they  are  also 
improperly  omitted  in  the  Protestant  translations ; 
and  thus  contribute  his  mite  towards  comple- 
ting Ward's  catalogue  of  errata.  The  truth, 
however,  is,  that  the  Protestant  translators,  in- 
stead of  thinking  the  words  for  all  improperly 
omitted,  were  conscious  that  they  formed  no  part 
of  the  sacred  texts,  and  therefore  printed  them 
in  italics,  as  an  indication  that  they  occurred 
not  in  the  original,  but  were  useful  to  form  a 
right  notion  of  the  apostle's  meaning.  Thus  is 
Dr.  Ryan  condemned  by  his  own  clients.  But, 
continues  the  Doctor,  "  The  term  once  without 
the.  addition  of  the  words  for  all,  would  not  jus- 
tify a  daily  oblation  :  for  where  we  are  sanctified 
through  the  offering  of  Jesus  Christ  once,  it 
must  be  unnecessary  to  repeat  it :  it  does  not 
follow  that,  because  Christ's  body  was  offered 
once  for  sinners,  it  should  be  daily  offered  for 
them."  (c)  Is  not  this  a  controversial  stratagem, 
a  ruse  de  guere,  to  draw  off  the  attention  of  the 
reader  from  the  real  state  of  the  question  ?  Ward 
did  not  say  that  because  Christ's  body  was  of- 
fered once,  it  follows  that  it  ought  to  be  offered 
daily.  He  was  not  so  weak  a  logician.  But  he 
did  say,  that  the  Protestant  translators  added 
the  words  for  all,  in  support  of  their  favourite 
doctrine  that  he  was  not  to  be  offered  daily  :  and 
I  confess,  I  think  he  is  not  mistaken  :  for  on  no 
other  ground  can  I  account  for  their  having 
added  the  words  for  all  in  this  passage,  and 
having  omitted  them  in  every  other  in  which  the 
Greek  term  eq>anu$  occurs.  As  to  the  assertion 
that,  "  where  we  are  sanctified  by  the  offering  of 
Jesus  Christ  once,  it  must  be  unnecessary  to 
repeat  it,"  I  beg  leave  to  refer  Dr.  Ryan  to  the 
commentary  of  St.  Chrysostom  on  this  very 
epistle,  a  writer  who  probably  understood  the 
Greek  language  as  well  as  modern  translators. 
From  that  ancient  father  he  will  learn,  that 
though  Christ  was  offered  once,  and  his  offering 
sufficeth  for  ever,  yet  we  offer  him  daily  :  but 
that  it  is  one  and  the  same  sacrifice,  because 
we  offer  one  and  the  same  victim.  Anal* 
nooar\vBxQr)J  xai  itg  to  ait  tjqxsob  .  .  .  n  ovv  ;  fym? 

(a)  Anal.,  p.  1 2. 

(6)  Rom.  ti.  10  ;  Heb.  vii.  28  ;  ix.  12. 

U)  Anal.,  p.  13. 


xaO  IxuoiTjv  f^eqav  ov  nqoocpeooiiEv  ;  nooaqieoofiEv, 
ukh  duvaftvrjoiv  noiovpEvoi,  iov  davuiov  dviov  xat 
juai  iojiv  &utt]  xai  6v  noXXat  ....  iov  yuq  tivrov 
dft  nqocq>EpojXEv  bu  vvv  (jev  eieqov,  uvqiov  devze- 
qov,  aW  (iet  to  uvio.  6>otb  fiia  turtv  ^  &voia.  In 
Epist.  ad  Heb.  c.  ix.  horn.  xvii. 


PROTESTANT    TRANSLATIONS 


THE  BLESSED  SACRAMENT,  AND 
THE  ALTAR. 

Dr.  Ryan  opens  his  remarks  on  this  section 
in  his  usual  maner.  "  Ward  charges  us  with 
misrendering  three  texts  ;  this  is  a  curious 
charge,  when  our  last  translation  of  two  out  of 
the  three  agrees  exactly  with  the  Popish  ;  and 
when  we  have  no  translation  of  the  third."  It 
will  not  be  a  difficult  task  to  unravel  the  web 
of  his  sophistry.  Ward  did  not  charge  the  last 
but  the  more  ancient  Protestant  translations 
with  misrendering  the  three  texts,  and  that  his 
charge  is  true,  is  evident  from  Dr.  Ryan's 
attempts  to  shift  the  question  from  one  version 
to  another.  As  to  the  assertion  that  there  is  no 
translation  of  the  third  ;  it  can  only  mean  that 
by  Protestants  it  is  not  accounted  part  of  the 
inspired  writings,  but  occurs  in  one  of  the  books 
which  they  have  classed  among  the  Apocrypha. 
He  proceeds  thus  :  "  Nor  need  our  first  trans- 
lators have  been  afraid  of  using  the  word  altars  ; 
as  there  is  no  evidence  that  the  Popish  altars 
resembled  those  of  the  apostolic  age."  Did 
ever  writer  trifle  more  egregiously  with  the 
judgment  and  the  patience  of  his  readers  1 
There  is  no  evidence  that  the  Popish  altars  re- 
sembled those  of  the  apostolic  age  :  therefore,  the 
first  Protestant  translators  need  not  have  been 
afraid  of  using  the  word  altars  !  But  is  Dr 
Ryan  then  willing  to  admit  that  Christians  made 
use  of  altars  as  early  as  the  apostolic  age  1  For 
what  purpose  did  they  make  use  of  them  ?  It 
must  have  been  for  sacrifice  :  otherwise  there 
could  have  been  no  more  need  of  altars  among 
Christians  in  the  apostolic  age,  than  among 
Protestants  in  the  present.  But  if  it  were  for 
sacrifice,  that  sacrifice  would  have  been  no  other 
in  substance  than  what  Catholics  call  the  sacri- 
fice of  the  mass. 

"  The  first  Protestant  translators  need  not 
have  been  afraid  of  the  word  altars  .'"  Why 
then  did  they  substitute  temple  in  its  place  ?  Dr. 
Ryan  cannot  here  have  recourse  to  his  former 
plea  of  their  ignorance  of  the  original  languages. 
The  veriest  smatterer  in  the  Greek  tongue 
could  have  informed  them  that  duoiaciiqiov  meant 
not  a  temple  but  an  altar.  Their  own  conduct 
in  falsifying  these  texts  shows,  that  they  were 
afraid  of  the  word.  For  what  but  fear,  and 
that  too  of  a  very  urgent  nature,  could  have 
impelled  men,  who  had  assumed  the  office  of 
apostles,  and  whose  existence  as  such  depended 
on  their  reputation,  to  pollute  that  office,  and 
hazard  that  reputation,  by  thus  wilfully  and  de- 
liberately corrupting  the  sacred  volumes  1 


PREFACE    TO    THE    FOURTH    EDITION. 


The  truth  is,  the  first  teachers  of  Protestantism 
had  reformed  religion  ;  they  found  it  also  neces- 
sary to  reform  the  inspired  writings.  They  had 
created  a  scriptural  church  without  a  sacrifice  : 
it  was  prudent  to  have  an  edition  of  the  scrip- 
tures without  any  honourable  mention  of  altars. 
Altars  and  sacrifice  are  correlative  terms  :  the 
one  naturally  leads  to  the  other.  When  the 
Christian  saciifice  was  abolished,  altars  were 
unnecessary.  They  had,  of  course,  treated  them 
with  every  species  of  indignity,  and  were  too 
cautious  politicians  to  permit  them  to  be  com- 
mended in  the  scriptures.  But  after  the  lapse 
of  a  century,  circumstances  were  changed  :  the 
generation  which  had  witnessed  the  altars  and 
the  sacrifice  of  the  Catholic  worship,  had  passed 
away.  A  new  race  of  men,  with  new  habits 
and  new  prejudices,  had  succeeded,  no  danger 
could  arise  from  the  adoption  of  the  term ;  and 
the  word  altar  was  silently  permitted  to  resume 
its  former  place  in  the  sacred  writings. 

Before  I  close  my  remarks  on  this  section,  I 
must  observe  that  Ward  has  noticed  another  cor- 
ruption of  the  text,  which  Dr.  Ryan  has  thought 
it  prudent  to  overlook.  In  1  Cor.  xi.  27,  the 
apostle  says,  Whosoever  shall  eat  this  bread,  or 
drink  this  cup  of  the  Lord  unworthily,  rt  mvi]  shall 
be  guilty  of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord  :  from 
which  disjunctive  proposition  Catholic  controvcr- 
tists  have  been  accustomed  to  draw  an  argument 
in  favour  of  communion  in  one  kind.  This  is  a 
matter  of  such  notoriety  that  a  divine  like  Dr. 
Ryan  could  not  be  ignorant  of  it.  In  the  first 
Protestant  Bibles  this  text  was  faithfully  trans- 
lated :  but  in  the  more  modern  it  has  been  cor- 
rupted by  the  substitution  of  the  copulative 
particle  and,  for  the  disjunctive  particle  or:  a 
substitution  of  which  Ward  most  justly  com- 
plains. Now,  in  what  manner  does  Dr.  Ryan 
defend  it  ?  He  is  silent  ;  he  docs  not  even  re- 
motely hint  that  such  a  corruptinn  has  been 
noticed  by  his  adversary.  Is  he  then  conscious 
of  the  fraud,  but  unwilling  that  it  should  come 
to  the  knowledge  of  his  Protestant  readers  1  I 
fear  this  is  the  only  consistent  explanation,  which 
his  conduct  will  admit.  It  certainly  is  not 
manly  :  but  it  would,  perhaps,  be  too  much  to 
expect  that  every  writer  should  have  the  honesty 
to  make  confessions,  which  would  go  to  crimi- 
nate himself.  However,  he  may  draw  this 
lesson  from  it :  that  he,  who  stands  in  need  of  so 
much  indulgence  himself,  should  be  cautious 
how  he  condemns  with  severity  the  imaginary 
blemishes,  which  he  may  fancy  that  he  discovers 
in  others. 


PROTESTANT  TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

PRIESTS,  PRIESTHOOD,  AND  HOLY 
ORDERS. 

On  this  subject  Dr.  Ryan  observes  :  "  Accord- 
ing to    Ward   we   misconstrued    six  texts,   by 
rendering  the  Greek  word  elder  instead  of  priest  : 
he  says,  we  did  so,  lest  the  term  priest  should 
2 


reflect  honour  on  the  Catholic  clergy."  (a) 
Reader,  consult  Ward,  and  thou  wilt  find  he  says 
no  such  thing.  Ward  attributes  the  suppression 
of  the  word  priest  to  the  suppression  of  the 
sacrifice  of  the  mass.  Where  there  is  no  altar 
or  sacrifice,  there  is  no  need  of  a  priest.  But 
Dr.  Ryan  has  forged  the  reason  which  he  here 
gives  to  Ward,  as  an  introduction  to  the  sarcasm 
against  the  Catholic  clergy,  which  immediately 
follows  it.  "  Elder,"  he  also  tells  us,  "  is  a 
more  literal  translation  of  the  Greek  word  than 
priest,  and  presbytery  than  priesthood  :  so  that 
the  Protestant  translators  are  not  chargeable 
with  a  mistranslation  of  these  words,  (b)  He 
will,  however,  allow  me  to  ask,  what  kind  of  men 
they  were,  whom  the  sacred  writers  designate 
by  the term  nosa8vTSQOi,1  Were  they  not  ministers 
of  religious  worship  ordained  for  that  purpose 
by  the  apostles  ?  As  a  minister  of  the  Estab- 
lished Church,  he  must  answer  in  the  affirmative. 
But  if  they  were,  what  is  the  proper  term 
by  which  such  ministers  are  described  in  the 
English  language  ?  Not  only  common  usage, 
but  the  very  language  of  the  Church  of  England 
decides  in  favour  of  the  word  priest.  If  then  the 
translators  of  the  Bible  meant  to  speak  a 
language  intelligible  to  their  readers,  they  ought 
to  have  translated  the  Greek  word  priests  and 
not  elders.  Were  I  to  request  the  favour  of 
Dr.  Ryan  to  translate  the  following  Latin  sen- 
tence :  "  Episcopus  Londinensis  cum  major* 
civitatis  et  duobus  ecclesiae  presbyteris  visitavit 
universitatcm  Oxonicnsem,"  would  he  prefer  as 
more  literal  such  a  version  as  this  :  the  overseer 
of  London,  with  the  greater  of  the  city,  and  two 
elders  of  the  church,  visited  the  generality  of 
Oxford  \ 

He  proceeds :  "  Ward  asserts  that  these 
translators  were  so  conscious,  that  their  bishops 
had  no  grace  to  confer  a  sacred  character,  by 
the  imposition  of  hands,  that  they  put  out  the 
word  grace  and  substituted  gift  in  two  passages 
of  St.  Paul."  When  will  Dr.  Ryan  cease  to 
deceive  his  reader  1  No  such  reason,  as  he  here 
relates,  occurs  in  Ward.  That  writer  ascribes 
the  substitution  of  the  term  gift,  to  the  doctrine 
which  the  reformers  preached,  that  order  was 
no  sacrament,  (c)  Whoever  is  conversant  with 
the  sacred  writings  will  agree  with  him  that 
Xaoiona  is  not  properly  rendered,  by  gift.  In 
scriptural  language  it  always  meant  grace,  or  a 
supernatural  gift. 

I  cannot  follow  him  through  all  his  mistakes 
in  this  section.  The  last  seems  to  prove  that  he 
had  hardly  looked  at  the  book  he  pretends  to 
refute.  "  We  are  charged,"  he  says?  "  with 
mistranslating  the  Greek  word  signifying  dea- 
con :  though  all  the  Protestant  versions  of  it 
agree  with  the  Popish  without  the  slightest  vari- 
ation !"  (d)  The  truth,  however  is,  that  Ward 
does  not  charge  them  with  mistranslating  the 
passage  in  question,  1  Tim.  iii.  12.  He  only 
notices  that  in  this  verse  it  was  translated  pro- 
perly :  and  yet  in  the  fourth  verse  preceding  it 


(a)  Anal. 
(fi)  Ibid. 


p.  14. 


(c)  Errata,  No.  V. 

(d)  Anal.,  p.  15. 


PREFACE    TO    THE    FOURTH    EDITION. 


was  rendered  in  the  more  ancient  versions, 
minister.  He  only  wishes  to  know  why  the 
same  word,  with  the  meaning  attached  to  it  in 
the  Greek,  should  in  the  short  space  of  four 
verses  be  rendered  by  a  different  word  in  Eng- 
lish ?  In  itself  this  is  not  a  matter  of  great  con- 
sequence :  but  I  thought  proper  to  notice  it  to 
expose  the  artifices  of  Dr.  Ryan,  who  can  thus 
condescend  to  calumniate  his  adversary,  that  he 
may  enjoy  a  short  and  dangerous  triumph. 


PROTESTANT    TRANSLATIONS 

AGAINST 

THE   AUTHORITY   OF    PRIESTS   AND 
BISHOPS. 

I  have  joined  these  two  sections  together, 
because  the  object  of  both  is  in  a  great  measure 
the  same,  to  determine  the  propriety  of  trans- 
lating certain  scriptural  terms,  according  to 
their  general  acceptation,  in  profane  rather  than 
ecclesiastical  language.  The  words  bishop, 
priest,  deacon,  angel,  though  originally  borrowed 
from  the  Greek,  have  for  more  than  a  thousand 
years  been  naturalized  among  us.  The  three 
former  serve  to  denote  persons  raised«to  certain 
offices  in  the  church:  the  last,  one  employed  in  the 
duty  of  the  heavenly  spirits.  Their  meaning  is 
perfectly  understood  by  every  man  who  can  speak 
the  English  language.  But  the  English  transla- 
tors, as  if  they  had  been  making  a  version  of 
some  profane  writer,  rejected  these  terms,  and 
employed  others  more  consonant  in  their  forma- 
tion to  the  meaning  of  the  radicals,  of  which  the 
Greek  words  are  composed.  Thus  bishop,  is 
rendered  overseer  ;  the  highest  functionary  in  the 
church  is  denoted  by  a  term,  which  in  common 
language  signifies  a  menial  servant :  priest  is 
translated  elder;  and  we  are  gravely  told  of 
choosing  and  ordaining  elders,  as  if  any  thing 
but  time  could  in  the  strict  meaning  of  the  word 
make  an  elder :  deacons  are  called  ministers,  a 
term  which  properly  includes  all  the  offices  of 
the  church  :  angels,  messengers,  a  wrord  which 
certainly  does  not  give  a  very  high  notion  of  the 
dignity  of  the  heavenly  spirits.  These  innova- 
tions Ward  condemns,  and,  I  think,  with  much 
justice.  He  attributes  them  to  the  unsettled 
state  of  religion,  when  the  first  English  versions 
were  made.  The  reformers  had  demolished  the 
ancient  fabric  :  they  had  not  agreed  what  to 
substitute  in  its  place.  It  was  therefore  politic 
in  them  to  exclude  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons 
from  the  scripture,  that  the  people,  who  from 
habit  had  been  accustomed  to  reverse  these  or- 
ders, might  not  conceive  there  was  any  founda- 
tion for  them  in  scripture.  From  the  words 
apostle  and  disciple,  no  danger  was  to  be  appre- 
hended. These  therefore  were  suffered  to 
remain.  Though,  had  the  translators  followed 
any  general  rule,  they  also  should  have  been 
metamorphosed  into  messengers  and  scholars. (a) 
* 

(a)  In  the  late  Bibles  the  words  Atanovov  and  AyyiKoa 
are  sometimes  rendered  properly. 


In  1  Peter  ii.  13,  we  read  in  the  Catholic 
version,  Be  subject.... whether  it  be  to  the  king, 
as  excelling :  in  the  Protestant,  whether  it  be  to 
the  king,  as  supreme.  Dr.  Ryan  observes,  "  the 
Greek  word  vkeqsxoj  signifies  supreme  as  well  as 
excelling  ;  so  that  it  is  not  very  material,  which 
way  it  is  rendered."(£)  It  should,  however,  be 
observed  that  in  the  more  ancient  version,  to 
afford  some  scriptural  foundation  for  the  king's 
claim  to  the  title  of  head  of  the  church,  it  was 
rendered,  to  the  king,  as  the  supreme  head,  a 
corruption  which  I  trust  Dr.  Ryan  will  not  have 
the  temerity  to  defend.  The  rendering  of  the 
more  modern  Bibles  is  less  objectionable,  though 
it  does  not  in  my  opinion  exactly  convey  the 
meaning  of  the  original  to  the  English  reader. 


PROTESTANT   TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

THE  SINGLE  LIVES  OF  PRIESTS. 

"  Ward,"  observes  Dr.  Ryan,  "  says  we  mis- 
rendered  the  following  text  of  St.  Paul  :  Have 
we  not  the  power  to  eat  and  to  drink — to  lead 
about  a  woman,  a  sister,  as  well  as  the  other 
apostles?  (1  Cor.  ix.  5.)  We  render,  a  wife,  a 
sister.  The  Greek  word  signifies  wife  as  well  as 
woman  :  so  that  our  translators  are  not  charge- 
able with  misconstruing  it."  What  idea  Dr.  Ryan 
may  have  formed  of  the  duties  of  a  scriptural 
translator,  I  know  not :  but  the  canon  which 
he  has  here  laid  down,  is,  I  conceive,  most  sin- 
gular in  its  nature,  and  most  pernicious  in  its 
application.  There  exists  hardly  a  word  in  any 
language  which  is  not  susceptible  of  several 
different  meanings  :  and  of  these  meanings  it 
appears  that  the  translator  of  the  scriptures  is  at 
liberty  to  select  that  which  may  please  him  best. 
Now  I  think,  and  I  trust  every  rational  man  will 
think  with  me,  that,  when  the  signification  of 
a  word  is  determined,  as  it  generally  is  by  the 
context,  the  translator  is  bound  to  adopt  that 
signification :  and  that,  when  it  is  not,  he  is  not  at 
liberty  to  select  the  meaning  that  may  please 
him  best,  but  ought  to  render  the  ambiguity  of  the 
text  by  an  expression  of  similar  ambiguity  in  the 
version  :  otherwise  he  does  not  offer  a  faithful 
copy  of  the  original  :  he  does  not  translate  but 
interpret :  he  substitutes  fallibility  for  infallibility 
and  gives  the  surmises  of  his  own  judgment  or 
prejudice  in  the  place  of  the  real  words  of  the 
inspired  writer.  It  is  true  that  the  Greek  word 
ywrj  signifies  wife  as  well  as  woman.  It  signifies 
wife  in  its  secondary,  woman  in  its  primary  and 
more  general  acceptation.  Now,  is  there  any 
thing  in  the  context  to  fix  it  to  its  secondary 
meaning  of  wife  ?  Nothing  ;  so  that  the  more 
ancient  writers,  whose  judgment  could  not  be 
biassed  by  controversial  disputes,  which  did  not 
arise  till  many  centuries  after  they  were  laid 
in  their  graves,  without  hesitation  translate  it 
woman,  and  explain  it  of  an  unmarried  woman. 
But  even  allowing  it  to  be  as  probable  that  St. 

(b)  Anal.,  p.  17. 


PREFACE  TO  THE  FOURTH   EDITION'. 


Paul  meant  a  married,  as  that  he  meant  an  un- 
married woman,  this  probability  should  at  least 
be  preserved  in  the  version,  by  the  adoption  of 
a  word  as  equally  susceptible  of  either  meaning 
as  the  Greek  word  in  the  original.  It  should  be 
translated  a  woman,  a  sister,  or  a  sister  woman, 
and  not  a  wife,  a  sister,  as  in  the  Protestant 
translation.  He  who  says,  a  woman,  does  not 
decide  whether  she  were  married  or  not :  but  he 
who  says,  a  wife,  determines  the  question  at  once, 
and  by  substituting  that  determination  in  place 
of  the  words  of  the  apostle,  corrupts  the  sacred 
volume,  and  deceives  the  credulity  of  his  readers. 

The  next  text  is  thus  rendered  in  the  Catholic 
•  version:  I  intreat  thee  also,  my  sincere  compan- 
ion :  in  the  Protestant,  my  true  yoke-fellow.  As 
Dr.  Ryan  justly  observes,  "  the  two  versions 
6eems  to  be  the  same  in  substance."  But  it 
should  be  remembered,  that  the  Protestant  transla- 
tion was  made  for  the  use  of  the  vulgar,  and  in  the 
ears  of  the  vulgar  yoke-fdlow  sounds  very  much 
like  wife.  Now,  why  did  the  Protestant  trans- 
lators act  so  very  differently  in  rendering  this 
and  the  preceding  text  ?  In  the  former  for  a 
word  of  doubtful  meaning  they  gave  us  another 
of  determinate  signification  :  in  this  the  meaning 
of  the  expression  is  evident,  (we  have  Dr.  Ryan's 
word  for  it,)  and  yet  they  render  it  by  a  term,  to 
say  the  best  of  it,  of  very  ambiguous  signification. 
To  solve  the  problem,  Ward  asserts  that  their 
object  was  to  teach  the  people  to  look  with  a 
more  favourable  eye  on  the  married  clergy :  and 
whoever  reflects  on  the  disputes  which  then  di- 
vided the  Christian  world  on  that  subject,  will 
not  think  his  opinion  devoid  of  probability. 

The  next  text  is  Matt.  xix.  1 1 .  Our  Saviour, 
speaking  of  the  virtue  of  continency,  says  :  Not 
all,  they  take  this  word ;  but  they  to  whom  it  is 
given.  The  Protestant  translation  has  all  men 
cannot  receive  this  word,  save  they  to  whom  it  is 
given.  "  A  curious  proof,"  remarks  Dr.  Ryan, 
"  that  we  mistranslated  to  justify  the  marriage 
of  the  clergy  !"  The  Dr.  may  make  light  of  the 
difference  between  the  two  versions  :  but  I  must 
be  allowed  to  maintain  that  the  Protestant  read- 
ing is  a  most  palpable  corruption.  It  is  confessed 
that  the  word  cannot  does  not  occur  in  the 
original  :  and  it  is  evident  that  it  cannot  be  added 
without  changing  the  sense.  It  affords  a  ready 
apology  to  every  slave  to  impure  gratification. 
Though  the  Dr.  asserts  that  there  is  little  differ- 
ence between  do  not  receive,  and  cannot  receive, 
I  think  few  of  our  readers  are  so  prejudiced  as 
not  to  admit  the  distinction  between  power  and 
act.  Every  one  must  know,  that  men  frequently 
do  not  perform  actions,  though  they  can  perform 
them.  In  short,  let  me  ask  why  the  translators 
added  the  word  cannot  ?  If  it  did  not  add  to  the 
meaning  of  the  original,  why  was  the  addition 
made  ?     If  it  did.  where  was  their  honesty  1 


PROTESTANT    TRANSLATIONS 
'AGAINST 

THE  SACRAMENT  OF  BAPTISM. 
Of  the  mistranslations  in  the  Protestant  Bible 
a  great  number  are  owing  to  the  peculiar  opin- 


ions of  their  authors :  and  as  these  are  now 
forgotten,  those  are  frequently  overlooked.  It 
was  the  favourite  tenet  of  Beza,  that  the  sacra- 
ments of  the  new  and  the  sacraments  of  the  old 
law  were  of  equal  efficacy  ;  and  that  the  baptism 
of  John  was  similar  to  the  baptism  of  Jesus. 
Now  there  occurs  a  passage  of  contrary  import 
in  Acts  xix.  3.  In  what,  said  St.  Paul  to  the 
Ephesians.  were  you  baptized  ?  And  they  said, 
in  John's  baptism.  Eia  ti  bvv  efiamiodrjie  ;  6t  Ss 
hinov.  Eia  to  Iwavvii  fianrtofia.  After  which, 
they  were  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Lord 
Jesus.  Eia  to  ovo/na  t»  Kvqib  Iyou.  To  elude  the 
force  of  this  text,  Beza  translated  :  Unto  what 
were  ye  baptized  ?  Unto  John's  baptism  :  and 
explained  John's  baptism  to  be  a  metaphor  ex- 
pressive of  John's  doctrine. (a)  Beza's  opinion 
was  adopted  by  the  English  translators,  and  with 
it  was  also  adopted  his  version :  though  in  the 
fourth  verse  they  render  the  same  Greek  words 
baptized  in  and  not  unto.  By  this  conduct  they 
have  undoubtedly  disfigured  and  corrupted  the 
text.  Of  their  readers  the  greater  part  are 
unable  to  affix  to  it  any  meaning  at  all  :  and  the 
few  that  do  understand  it,  are  presented  with 
an  erroneous  version.  Ward  then  was  correct 
in  numbering  this  passage  among  the  Errata. 
Dr.  Ryan  in  its  defence  only  alleges,  that  the 
difference  between  the  Catholic  and  Protestant 
versions  is  too  trivial  to  be  noticed  :  "  into,  unto, 
you  and  ye  !  .'"  But  I  would  have  him  to  reflect 
that  the  change  of  a  single  syllable  will  fre- 
quently cause  a  very  important  change  in  the 
sense  :  and  to  recollect  that  the  Catholic  version 
reads  in  and  not  into,  as  he  has  thought  proper 
to  assert. 

In  Titus  iii.  5,  the  Apostle  says  that  we  have 
been  saved  "  by  the  laver  of  regeneration,  and 
the  renovation  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  whom  /*e(God) 
has  poured  upon  us."  In  this  text,  which 
evidently  alludes  to  baptism,  the  Apostle  clearly 
says  that  the  Holy  Ghost  is  poured  upon  us  in 
that  sacrament.  But  this  did  not  coincide  with 
the  views  of  Calvin,  who  therefore  boldly  ren- 
dered Sia  kovroov  7ta).iv'tevtaiag,  xai  uvaxaiviDOEbiz 
nvevfiaiog  uyw,  6  H-e'/eev  lep  ^/uag,  per  lavacrum 
regenerationis  spiritus  sancti  quod  effudit  in  nos. 
The  English  translators  reversed  the  authority 
of  Calvin  ;  and  therefore  preferring  his  version 
to  the  words  of  the  original,  they  also  rendered 
it,  by  the  fountain  of  the  regeneration  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  which  he  shed  on  us."  If  it  be  said 
that  the  relative  which  is  ambiguous,  and  may 
be  referred  either  to  fountain  or  Holy  Ghost,  I 
ask,  why,  where  the  original  is  clear,  did  they 
prefer  ambiguity?  why  did  they  select  the  veil) 
to  shed,  which  alludes  rather  to  the  fountain  than 
the  Holy  Ghost,  and  why  did  they  so  scrupu- 
lously adhere  to  Calvin's  version,  as  to  suppress 
the  very  words  which  he  suppressed  ?  In  the 
modern  English  Bibles,  the  words  originally 
suppressed,  are  indeed  restored,  and  fountain  is 
changed  into  washing :  but  the  ambiguous  relative 
which,  and  the  verb,  to  shed,  are  still  retained. 
Dr.  Ryan  owns  that  the  Catholic  version  is 
preferable. 

(a)  Bez.  annnt.  in  Act.  xix. 


PREFACE    TO    THE    FOURTH    EDITION. 


PROTESTANT    TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

CONFESSION  AND  THE  SACRAMENT 
OF  PENANCE. 

On  this  subject  the  point  at  issue  between 
Ward  and  Dr.  Ryan  is  the  true  meaning  of  the 
Greek  verb  psxavosiv.  According  to  the  Doc- 
tor it  implies  sorrow  for  sin  with  a  firm  resolu- 
tion of  amendment,  and  is  therefore  properly 
rendered  by  the  Protestant  translators  to  repent. 
According  to  Catholics,  it  implies  not  only 
sorrow  and  a  purpose  of  amendment,  but  also 
an  external  demonstration  of  that  sorrow  by 
good  works  performed  in  a  penitential  spirit, 
such  as  prayer,  alms,  and  fasting,  of  which  nu- 
merous instances  are  recorded  in  holy  writ.  The 
Catholic  translators  have  therefore  rendered  it, 
to  do  penance.  Now,  that  their  rendering  is 
accurate  I  think  clear:  lstly,  from  some  of  the 
texts  themselves,  which  mention  bodily  afflic- 
tion as  an  adjunct  to  the  sorrow  and  amend- 
ment required.  Thus  we  read,  Matt.  xi.  21, 
Luke  x.  13,  They  had  done  penance  (repented 
Prot.  ver.)  in  sackcloth  and  ashes  ;  2ndly,  from 
the  ancient  Greek  ecclesiastical  writers,  who 
probably  understood  the  real  import  of  their 
own  language  as  well  as  the  Protestant  transla- 
tors. Now  those  always  style  the  performance 
of  penitential  works  (isravoux.  Thus  St.  Basil, 
speaking  of  the  prayers,  the  abstinence,  the  sack- 
cloth and  ashes  of  the  Ninivites,  exclaims  : 
ToQavri]  fy  tcov  duaQTiaig  lve%ouBVb)v  juezafoia  ;(a) 
3d,  from  the  austerities  to  which  in  the  ancient 
church  public  sinners  were  subjected,  who  were 
then  termed  61  hv  ttj  ^exavoia  aviso  ;  4th  from  the 
translator  of  the  Vulgate  and  the  Latin  fathers,  who 
render  it  by  "  penitentiam  agere."  To  these  I  may 
add  Ausonius  the  poet  in  the  well  known  passage, 

Sum  Dea,  quae  facti,  non  factique  exigo  poenas  ; 
Scilicet  ut  poeniteat,  sic  ^ravoia  vocor. 


PROTESTANT   TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

THE  HONOUR  OF  OUR  LADY  AND 
OTHER  SAINTS. 

I  shall  not  dwell  long  on  the  texts  enumerated 
under  this  head,  as  they  are  of  minor  importance. 
By  Ward  they  were  noticed  with  no  other  view 
than  to  show,  how  scrupulously  anxious  the 
Protestant  translators  were  not  to  contaminate 
the  orthodoxy  of  their  version  by  any  approach 
towards  the  language  of  Catholics.  I  shall  give 
one  instance.  In  Psalm  exxxix.  17,  occurs  the 
following  passage  : — Thy  friends,  O  God,  are 
become  exceedingly  honourable  :  their  princedom 
is  exceedingly  strengthened.  In  the  Catholic 
service  this  text  is  applied  to  the  saints  ;  a  suffi- 
cient argument  for  its  exclusion  from  a  Protes- 
tant Bible.  That  the  Hebrew  word  •psn  ori- 
ginally meant    thy  friends,    and    tittimn    their 

(a)  St.  Bas.  hom.  in  fame  et  siceitate. 


princedom,  cannot  be  denied.  They  had  been 
rendered  so  by  the  Greek  translator,  and  the 
Latin  translator,  and  the  Syriac  translator,  and 
the  Arabic  translator,  and  the  Ethiopia  trans- 
lator, and  the  Chaldaic  paraphrast.  But  then 
it  was  the  misfortune  of  these  writers  to  live 
before  the  reformation.  Hatred  of  Popery  had 
not  disclosed  to  them  all  the  mysteries  of  the 
Hebrew  language.  Our  Protestant  translators 
applied  to  the  task  ;  and  by  the  magic  touch  of 
their  pen,  the  friends  of  God,  and  their  prince- 
dom, were  translated  into  the  thoughts  of  God 
and  their  sum.  "  How  precious  are  thy  thoughts 
unto  me,  O  God !  and  how  great  is  the  sum  of 
them."  But  this  version,  if  it  cannot  lay  claim 
to  accuracy,  has  at  least  one  advantage.  It 
offers  to  the  piety  of  the  orthodox  churchman  a 
new  subject  of  meditation,  the  sum  of  God's 
thoughts.  Truly,  if  men  are  determined  to 
corrupt  the  language  of  scripture,  let  them  at 
least  make  it  speak  sense.  To  pervert  it  from 
its  true  meaning  is  guilt  sufficient  :  to  transform 
it  into  nonsense  is  a  work  of  supererogation  :  it 
is  more  than  is  necessary  for  the  support  of  or- 
thodoxy. 


PROTESTANT    TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

THE  DISTINCTION  OF  RELATIVE 
AND  DIVINE  WORSHIP. 

In  Hebrews  xi.  21,  it  is  said  of  Jacob,  nqo- 
OGXvvrjaEv  em  to  (xhqoptijo-  gufide  avxa  ;  which  in 
the  Catholic  translation  is  rendered,  according 
to  the  Vulgate,  adored  the  top  of  his  (Joseph's) 
rod :  in  the  Protestant,  worshipped,  leaning  on 
the  top  of  his  staff.  Among  the  ancient  writers 
there  were  two  opinions  respecting  the  meaning 
of  this  passage,  and  that  to  which  it  alludes, 
Genesis  xlvii.  31.  St.  Augustine  expounded 
them  to  mean  that  Jacob  adored  God,  leaning 
on  his  staff,  and  St.  Jerom  countenances  this 
opinion  by  translating  the  Hebrew  :  "  adoravit 
Israel  deum,  conversus  ad  lectuli  caput."  But 
the  general  opinion  was,  that  Jacob  in  this 
instance  directed  his  respect  not  immediately  to 
God,  but  to  his  son  Joseph.  Those,  however, 
who  held  this  opinion,  were  divided  in  their 
manner  of  explaining  it.  "  He  worshipped 
Joseph,"  says  Theophylactus,  "  pointing  out  the 
worship  of  the  whole  people.  But  how  did  he 
worship  1  On  the  top  of  his  staff :  that  is,  sup- 
porting himself  on  his  staff  on  account  of  his 
age.  But  some  say  he  worshipped  towards  the 
top  of  Joseph's  rod,  signifying  by  the  rod  the 
sceptre  of  the  kingdom  which  would  be  after- 
wards worshipped."  (b)  Of  these  two  opinions 
the  former  was  adopted  by  Theodoret  ;  "  Israel 
sat  resting  on  his  staff,  and  worshipped  bending 

(i)  YIpoiTCKVpriae  Ttf  lonretpt  rrjv  iravros  rov  \aov  TrpooKWriaiu 
bifkodv'  ITaxr  <5s  TTpooSKwr/o-cn  ',  cirt  to  &Kpov  rr\a  paafiov  avrov, 
tovtmttiv,  eiupeioOcia  rripa08;o  ita  to  yepaa.  Tivea  it  ttri  to 
UKpovTrjcr  pafiiov  tov  \wat<p,  <pao-it  TrpooCKwrjoe,  oijfiawuv  to  Ttja 
0aai\ctaa  oxv^rpov    <]ta  T*)a  pa06ov    vpoaKW*]OriotaOai    jtcWoy. 

Theophyl.  in  cap.  xi.  ad  Hfeb. 


PREFACE    TO    THE    FOURTH    EDITION. 


his  head  on  his  staff:"  (a)  the  latter  by  St.  Atha- 
nasius,  who  in  quoting  the  passage  inserts  the 
words  i5«8  duia  "  the  rod  of  his  son  ,"  (b)  and  by 
St.  Chrysostom,  who  says,  "  though  an  old  man 
he  worshipped  Joseph,  foretelling  the  future 
worship  to  be  rendered  by  the  whole  people."  (c) 
In  such  diversity  of  sentiment  no  translator  can 
be  blamed  for  adopting  either  opinion.  I  would 
translate  it,  He  bowed  to  the  top  of  Joseph's 
staff. 

In  Ps.  xcviii.  5,  it  is  said,  according  to  the 
Catholic  version,  adore  the  footstool  of  his  feet, 
because  it  is  holy :  in  the  Protestant,  worship  at 
his  footstool,  for  he  is  holy.  The  former  version 
is  favourable  to  the  exhibition  of  religious  re- 
spect to  creatures  ;  the  latter  does  not  necessarily 
exclude  it.  I  do  not,  however,  think  that  the 
Protestant  rendering  is  accurate.  The  Hebrew 
phrase  is  applied  in  the  scriptures  to  the  true 
God,  to  imaginary  gods,  and  to  creatures  :  and 
the  nature  of  the  worship,  which  it  denotes,  is 
determined  by  the  nature  of  its  object.  But  the 
reformers  had  rejected  that  respect,  which  Ca- 
tholics allow  on  religious  motives  to  be  sometimes 
paid  to  creatures  ■  and  it  was  of  course  improper 
to  permit  any  traces  of  it  to  be  found  in  the 
sacred  volumes.  Thus  the  same  phrase  adopted 
different  meanings  at  the  will  of  the  translaior  : 
and  the  same  preposition  on  one  occasion  pointed 
out  the  object  of  worship,  at  another  excluded 
it  :  nrft  trnmcn  kJ>  is  rendered,  thou  shah 
not  bow  down  thyself  to  them:  and  tnrrb  vr.--- 
worship  at  his  footstool.  If  in  the  former 
passage  the  Hebrew  phrase  means  to  bow  down 
to,  how  comes  it  to  mean  to  worship  at,  in  the 
latter  ?  I  fear,  that  in  this  text,  as  in  many 
others,  the  prejudices  of  the  translators  pre- 
vailed over  their  respect  for  the  original.  In 
the  Catholic  version  we  read,  for  it  is  holy  ;  in 
the  Protestant,  for  he  is  only.  The  Hebrew 
text  will  bear  either  meaning. 


PROTESTANT   TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

SACRED  IMAGES  AND  AGAINST  THE 
USE  OF  THEM. 

Among  the  different  arts  by  which  the  apos- 
tles of  the  reformation  contrived  to  inflame  the 
animosity  of  their  disciples  against  the  Church 
of  Rome,  few  were  more  efficacious  than  the 
clamour  which  they  raised  against  the  worship 
of  images.  According  to  the  new  gospel, 
every  species  of  religious  respect  offered  to 
inanimate  objects  was  idolatrous :  and  to  prove 
the  truth  of  this  doctrine,  almost  every  page  of 
scripture  was  improved  by  new  denunciations 
of  vengeance  against  images,  and  their  worship- 

(a)  E«ca9«o-0r7  (iaKTtpia  it  Ktxpnptvoa  liriarijpi^Te  dorr). 
TlpoacKVvriasv    i-rriK^ivaar    rrj    pafffiu     rr\»  gt<pa\t)v.      Theod.  in 

Gen.  interrog.  109. 
(ft)  Homil.  in  St.  Patres,  11,  p.  693. 

(c)  Kat  ycpwv  u>v,  f]ir\  itpoetKVvt]Ot  to)  \biot(p,  rr\v  vavroa  tov 
\aov  irpoaKwrtuiv  <JijXu>y    tijv    taoptvnv    avTco.      HoDl.  XXVI.  in 

epia.  ad  Heb. 


pers.  No  less  than  thirteen  different  words  in 
the  Hebrew,  and  nine  in  the  Greek  scriptures, 
were  invariably  rendered  image  in  the  English 
version  :  so  wonderfully  comprehensive  is  the 
meaning  of  that  single  word  in  orthodox  lan- 
guage. Of  the  texts,  which  had  been  thus  cor- 
rupted, two  proved  eminently  useful.  In  2  Cor. 
vi.  16,  the  Apostle  was  made  to  say  :  How 
agrecth  the  temple  of  God  with  images  ?  and  this 
corruption  furnished  every  iconoclast  preacher 
with  a  most  powerful  text,  when  he  urged  the 
credulity  of  his  hearers  to  deface  the  ornaments 
with  which  Catholic  piety  had  been  accustomed 
to  decorate  religious  edifices.  The  other  text 
occurred  1  John.  v.  22,  babes,  keep  yourselves 
from  images ;  and  this,  when  the  house  of  God 
had  been  purged  from  every  trace  of  Popish 
idolatry,  was  constantly  painted  in  large  cha- 
racters within  the  door.  Useful,  however,  as 
these  texts  have  been,  they  no  longer  appear  in 
the  sacred  volumes.  They  were  suffered  to 
effect  the  purpose  of  their  authors,  and  then 
were  directly  consigned  to  oblivion.  The  same 
has  been  the  fate  of  several  others  of  similar 
import,  as  Dr.  Ryan  acknowledges  :  "  but  then," 
he  adds,  "  having  been  corrected,  Ward  should 
not  have  inserted  them  in  his  list."  Why  not  ? 
Did  they  not  originally  exist  in  the  Protestant 
version  T  Were  they  not  received  by  the  people 
as  part  of  the  original  text  ?  Undoubtedly. 
Ward  then  could  not  have  omitted  them  without 
betraying  the  cause  he  had  undertaken  to 
defend. 

But  though  several  of  these  texts  have  been 
corrected  by  men,  whose  more  moderate  ortho- 
doxy cold  blush  at  the  daring  effrontery  of 
their  predecessors,  Ward  still  complains  that 
several  are  also  left,  which  equally  require  cor- 
rection. In  the  Protestant  version  of  the 
decalogue  are  read,  thou  shall  not  make  to  thy- 
self any  graven  image,  instead  of  graven  thing. 
"  But  where,"  says  Dr.  Ryan,  "  is  the  difference  ? 
When  a  thing  is  graven,  it  becomes  an  image, 
and  a  graven  thing  must  be  the  image  of  some- 
thing real  or  imaginary."  (d)  If  the  authors  of 
the  Protestant  version  reasoned  in  this  manner, 
they  deserved  no  less  praise  as  logicians  than  as 
translators.  Every  graven  thing  must  neces- 
sarily be  an  image,  why,  then  I  suppose  every 
graven  ornament  is  to  be  called  an  image,  the 
pillars  that  adorn  our  porticoes  will  be  images  : 
even  our  houses  of  polished  and  ornamented 
stone  must  become  images.  That  the  Hebrew 
word  in  its  original  meaning  denotes  a.  graven 
thing,  cannot  be  denied  :  and  that  it  may  some- 
times mean  an  image,  I  will  allow.  But  in  what 
sense  does  Dr.  Ryan  wish  it  to  be  taken  ?  If  in  the 
latter,  yet  from  the  context  it  is  evident  that  it 
denotes  an  image  to  which  divine  worship  is  to 
be  paid  :  and  such  an  image  in  plain  English  is 
an  idol.  Thus  it  was  rendered  by  the  Greek 
translators,  and  thus  it  ought  to  have  been 
rendered  by  the  Protestant.  But  if  he  takes 
it  in  the  former  sense,  the  present  rendering  is 
also  false  :   as   it  restrains   the   prohibition  to 

(^)  Anal.,  p.  25. 


10 


PREFACE   TO    THE    FOURTH    EDITION. 


images,  whereas  in  the  original  it  includes  under 
the  denomination  of  graven  things,  the  columns 
of  stones,  which  were  the  objects  of  worship  to 
many  of  the  ancient  nations. 

In  two  other  texts,  Rom.  xi.  4. ;  Acts  xix. 
35,  it  is  acknowledged  that  image  does  not 
occur  in  the  original.  It  has  been  preserved 
in  the  Protestant  version  as  a  memorial  of  the 
devotion  which  the  reformed  translators  paid  to 
this  important  word.  It  was  their  most  useful 
auxiliary  :  and  they  have  rewarded  its  services 
by  still  giving  it  a  niche  in  the  inspired  writings. 


PROTESTANT    TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

LIMBUS    PATRUM   AND  PURGATORY. 

On  this  subject,  after  a  long  preamble  in 
which  he  shows  but  little  acquaintance  with  the 
Catholic  doctrine,  Dr.  Ryan  calls  on  Popish 
divines  to  show  that  the  twelve  texts  mentioned 
by  Ward  prove  the  doctrine  or  existence  of  the 
Limbus  patrum  or  purgatory.  But  this  is 
unnecessary  in  the  present  instance.  The  point 
to  be  determined  is,  whether  the  Hebrew  word 
^aco  denotes  the  grave,  as  it  is  rendered  in  the 
Protestant  version,  or  the  state  of  the  soul  after 
death,  as  it  was  understood  by  the  Catholic  trans- 
lators. Now,  1st,  that  it  will  admit  of  the  lat- 
ter meaning  must  be  acknowledged  by  Dr.  Ryan 
himself:  since  in  three  instances  to  allow  its 
insertion,  the  word  grave  has  been  expunged  in 
the  corrected  editions  of  the  Protestant  Bible. 
2nd.  The  proper  Hebrew  term  for  the  grave  is 
•top  •  nor  can  I  find  any  proof  that  J>->ja>  is 
ever  employed  in  that  sense  in  the  scriptures,  (a) 
In  every  passage  in  which  it  occurs,  it  will 
easily  bear  the  meaning  ascribed  to  it  by  the 
Catholic  translators :  in  some  it  cannot  bear 
that  which  is  given  to  it  in  the  Protestant  ver- 
sion. Thus,  when  Jacob  said,  "  /  will  go  down 
into  ^IJO)  unto  my  son  mourning ;"  he  could 
not  mean  the  grave.  He  certainly  did  not  con- 
ceive Joseph's  soul  to  have  been  buried  :  and  as 
for  his  body  he  could  not  expect  to  find  it  in  the 
grave,  as  he  believed  it  to  have  been  devoured 
by  wild  beasts.  In  favour  of  his  opinion  Dr. 
Ryan  adduces  the  Samaritan  version  in  which 
this  text,  as  he  says,  is  rendered  the  grave.  I 
fear,  however,  that,  unable  to  read  the  Sama- 
ritan version  itself,  he  has  been  deceived  by  the 
treacherous  authority  of  its  Latin  translator. 
The  Latin  translator  of  the  Samaritan  version 
has  indeed  rendered  Gen.  xxxvii.  35,  sepulchrum: 
but  in  the  version  itself  we  read,  ^vnc,  which  is 
evidently  the  same  word  as  the  Hebrew,  and  has 
the  same  meaning ;  and  which  the  same  trans- 
lator in  the  parallel  passages,  Gen.  xlii.  38  ; 
xliv.  29,  31,  has  rendered  by  the  Latin  word 
Inferi.     3rd.    If   modern    Lexicographers   give 

(a)  In  the  passages  usually  refered  to,  1  Kings  xi.  G,  10, 
it  is  rendered  aSn",  inferi,  by  the  ancient  translators. 
They  looked  on  irtoin  his  old  age,  as  a  figurative  ex- 
pression for  him  in  Ids  old  age. 


both  meanings  to  the  Hebrew  word,  I  can  op- 
pose to  their  authority  that  of  the  ancient  Greek 
and  Latin  interpreters,  who  as  invariably  render 
Jnjoc  lidna,  inferi,  infernus,  as  they  do  i^P, 
Taq>oa,  (ivrtfia,  sepulchrum.  It  is  from  them  that 
the  true  meaning  of  this  ancient  language  is  to 
be  learned.  If,  however,  Dr.  Ryan  refuses  to 
submit  to  them,  I  trust  he  will  not  reject  the 
authority  of  St.  Peter,  who  in  Acts  xi.  27, 
translates  it  tidno,  and  in  obedience  to  wKom  the 
correctors  of  the  Protestant  Bible  have  in  this 
instance  erased  the  word  grave,  by  which  it  had 
been  rendered  in  the  more  ancient  editions. 

Dr.  Ryan  wishes  to  persuade  his  readers  that 
Ward  introduced  the  text  from  Heb.  v.  7,  as  a 
proof  of  the  existence  of  purgatory.  Why 
should  he  thus  misrepresent  his  adversary  1  In 
discoursing  of  the  foregoing  texts.  Ward  had 
occasion  to  mention  that  article  of  the  creed,  in 
which  Christians  profess  their  belief  in  the  de- 
scent of  our  Saviour  into  hell :  and  this  had  led 
him  to  censure  the  opinion  of  Calvin  and  Beza 
that  the  descent  into  hell  was  only  a  metaphorical 
expression,  significative  of  the  anguish  of  de- 
spair, and  the  horrors  of  damnation,  which  Jesus 
felt  on  the  cross.  To  countenance  so  blasphe- 
mous an  idea,  the  Protestant  translators  added 
their  mite  ;  and  in  rendering  that  passage,  in 
which  St.  Peter  alludes  to  the  prayer  of  Jesus 
on  the  cross,  tell  us  that  he  was  heard  in  that 
which  he  feared.  The  Greek  is  dcaoTvo-  LvXuGsiao, 
which  in  the  Catholic  version  is  translated, 
he  was  heard  for  his  reverence.  What  plea 
may  be  offered  in  defence  of  the  Protestant 
rendering  I  know  not.  Dr.  Ryan  has  offered 
none.  I  may  therefore  assume  that  it  is  inde- 
fensible. 


PROTESTANT     TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

JUSTIFICATION   AND    THE    REWARD 
OF  GOOD  WORKS. 

Dr.  Ryan  observes  that  the  texts  enumerated 
by  Ward  in  this  section  were  too  obscure  to 
induce  the  Protestant  translators  to  misrender 
them.  But  this  is  shifting  the  question.  The 
point  in  debate  is  not,  whether  these  texts  be 
obscure  or  not ;  but  whether  they  be  fairly  ren- 
dered in  the  Protestant  version.  Ward  asserts 
they  are  not :  and  I  think  he  has  made  out  a 
pretty  strong  case.  The  Protestant  translators 
were  violent  champions  in  favor  of  justification 
by  faith  only,  and  whoever  consults  this  version 
will  find  that  they  had  two  sets  of  English  words 
to  express  the  Greek  word  dixrj  and  its  deri- 
vations. When  they  were  united  in  the  scriptures 
with  the  word  fax th,  then  they  were  rendered  by 
just,  justice,  justification  ;  but  if  they  were  united 
with  words  expressive  of  the  reward  or  practice 
of  good  works,  just  and  justification  disappeared, 
and  righteous  and  righteousness  were  adopted 
in  their  place.  If  nothing  unfair  were  meant, 
what  motive  could  they  have  for  this  verbal 
legerdemain  1     How   comes   it,  that   the  same 


PREFACE    TO    THE    FOURTH    EDITION'. 


11 


Greek  words  should  be  cautiously  rendered  by 
two  different  sets  of  English  words,  and  that 
these  should  be  alternately  adopted  as  they  fa- 
voured the  opinions  of  the  translators,  or  were 
adverse  to  those  of  their  antagonists. 


PROTESTANT     TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

MERIT  AND  MERITORIOUS  WORKS. 

In  this  section  Ward  produces  five  texts 
which,  he  maintains,  have  been  falsely  rendered 
in  the  Protestant  Bible.  In  answer,  Dr.  Ryan 
compares  these  texts  as  they  now  stand,  with  the 
same  passages  in  the  Catholic  version,  and  very 
gravely  asks  where  is  the  difference  1  But  know, 
gentle  reader,  that  he  quotes  from  the  amended 
version,  in  which  the  three  principal  corruptions 
have  been  corrected  ;  while  Ward  complains  of 
the  original  translation.  Such  artifices  are  but 
sorry  indications  of  the  confidence  which  Dr. 
Ryan  professes  in  the  goodness  of  his  cause. 

Of  the  remaining  texts,  one  (Coloss.  i.  12), 
according  to  fche  Catholic  version,  declares  that 
God  has  made  us  worthy ;  according  to  the 
Protestant,  has  made  us  meet  to  be  partakers  of 
the  inheritance  of  the  saints.  The  Greek  is 
Ixavooavji  \  and  as  the  Protestant  translators 
have  rendered  Ixat oa  worthy  in  Matt.  Ui.  11, 
and  viii.  8,  I  see  not  why  they  should  here  have 
rendered  it  meet,  were  it  not  to  avoid  the  Ca- 
tholic doctrine  of  merit.  The  other  passage  is 
in  Ps.  cxix.  112,  in  which  5P»  is  rendered  for 
reward,  by  the  Catholic  ;  unto  the  end,  by  the 
Protestant  version.  There  is  something  very 
singular  in  the  fate  of  this  word.  If  in  this 
passage  the  Catholic  translator  has  rendered  it 
for  reward,  in  verse  33  of  the  same  psalm  he 
has  rendered  it  always  :  and  in  like  manner,  if 
in  this  passage  the  Protestant  translator  has  ren- 
dered it  unto  the  end,  in  Psalm  xix.  12,  he  has 
rendered  it  reward.  In  this  confusion  of  ren- 
derings I  should  think  it  the  most  prudent  to 
adhere  to  the  ancient  Greek  interpreter,  rather 
than  the  modern  translators.  He  probably  pos- 
sessed more  accurate  MSS-,  and  certainly  was 
more  intimately  acquainted  with  the  original 
language. 


PROTESTANT  TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

FREE  WILL. 

Of  the  seven  texts  enumerated  by  Ward  under 
this  head,  three,  according  to  Dr.  Ryan,  have 
been  corrected  ;  a  sufficient  proof  that  in  the 
original  Protestant  version  they  were  rendered 
corruptly.  It  will  be  easy  to  vindicate  Ward's 
remarks  on  the  remaining  four. 

1st.  The  Greek  text,  1  Cor.  xv.  10,  is  sus- 
ceptible of  two  meanings  :  that  the  grace  of 
God  laboured  alone,  or  that  the  grace  of  God 
and  the  apostle  laboured  together.     The  Pro- 


testant version,  by  inverting  the  words,  "  which 
was  with  me,"  appears  to  restrain  the  sense  to 
the  former  meaning,  and  in  that  respect  is  not  a 
faithful  representation  of  the  original. 

2nd.  Romans  v.  6,  the  apostle  says  that  of 
ourselves  we  were  Aodsveia,  which  the  Protestant 
version  renders  without  strength.  The  true 
meaning  is  weak  :  but  weakness  does  not  imply 
a  total  deprivation  of  strength. 

3rd.  The  Protestant  version  renders  Ai  fajoXai 
uvtu  SaqBiai  ax  bioiv,  1  John  v.  3,  his  command- 
ments are  not  grievous.  Instead  of  grievous 
Ward  contends  we  should  read  heavy-  And 
that  he  is  accurate  will,  I  trust,  appear  by 
comparing  this  passage  with  that  in  St.  Matt, 
xi.  30. 

4th.  Matt.  xix.  11,  is  rendered  in  the  Protes- 
tant version  :  all  men  cannot  receive  this  saying. 
Dr.  Ryan  acknowledges  that  cannot  is  an  inter- 
polation, by  proposing  a  different  version  of  his 
own,  in  which  that  word  is  omitted.  The  trans- 
lators must  have  trusted  much  to  the  credulity  of 
their  readers,  when  they  dared  thus  to  add  to 
the  meaning  of  the  original.  Their  disciples 
however,  unconscious  of  the  deception,  prided 
themselves  on  their  imaginary  happiness  ;  and, 
while  they  derived  new  lights  from  the  blunders 
anil  corruptions  of  the  translators,  wondered  at 
their  former  ignorance,  and  pitied  the  blindness 
of  the  slaves  of  Popery. 


PROTESTANT   TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

INHERENT  JUSTICE. 

Among  the  new  doctrines  sported  by  the  apos- 
tles of  the  reformation,  was  that  of  imputative 
justice.  No  man,  how  virtuously  soever  he  might 
have  lived,  could  be  just  or  righteous  indeed, 
but  only  in  as  much  as  the  justice  or  righteous- 
ness of  Christ  was  imputed  to  him.  With  the 
merits  or  demerits  of  this  opinion  I  have  no 
concern  :  but  among  the  texts  by  which  it  was 
assailed  or  defended,  Ward  has  selected  six, 
which  he  maintains  to  have  been  corrupted  by 
the  zeal  of  the  Protestant  translators.  Dr.  Ryan 
contents  himself  with  replying  very  gravely,  that 
neither  do  the  Catholic  versions  prove,  nor  the 
Protestant  versions  disprove  the  contrary  doc- 
trine of  inherent  justice. 

Of  all  the  theological  champions,  with  whom 
it  has  been  my  lot  to  be  acquainted,  Dr.  Ryan 
conducts  controversy  in  the  most  singular  man- 
ner. Ward  had  asserted  that  in  more  than  one 
hundred  passages  the  Protestant  version  of  the 
scriptures  was  corrupted  :  he  noticed  in  detail 
every  one  of  these  corruptions,  and  subjoined 
to  each  the  reasons  on  which  he  founded  his 
charge.  Then  came  Dr.  Ryan,  and  undertook 
to  rebut  the  accusations.  But  how  does  he 
proceed  ?  Does  he  refute  each  of  Ward's  ar- 
guments ?  No,  he  does  not  so  much  as  mention 
them.  A  reader,  who  had  perused  none  but 
Dr.  Ryan's  tract,  would  not  know  that.  Ward 
had    a   single    reason   to   offer.      The    Doctor 


12 


PREFACE    TO    THE    FOURTH    EDITION. 


throughout  appears  attempting  to  silence  a  dumb 
adversary,  to  conquer  a  man  who  makes  no 
resistance.  Now  whence  arises  this  conduct  in 
Dr.  Ryan  1  Was  he  unwilling  to  refute  Ward's 
argument  ?  But  who  can  suspect  of  unwilling- 
ness in  such  a  cause  the  self-created  representa- 
tive of  the  Ryans,  who  lost  so  extensive  a  terri- 
tory by  the  papal  grant  of  Ireland  to  Henry  II.  1 
Was  he  unable  to  refute  them  1  I  believe  he 
was.  However,  let  his  reasons  have  been  what 
they  may,  this  is  certain,  that  instead  of  answer- 
ing, he  has  passed  over  the  arguments  of  Ward, 
as  if  he  had  never  seen  them.  But  to  proceed 
to  the  texts  in  question. 

1st.  The  first  is  a  passage  of  considerable  ob- 
scurity, Rom.  v.  18.  By  the  Rhemish  transla- 
tors it  has  been  rendered  with  the  most  scrupu- 
lous and  laudable  fidelity,  while  the  Protestant 
translators  have  undertaken  to  make  it  more 
clear  by  supplying  such  words,  as  they  thought 
wanting.  If  Ward  complain  of  these  additions, 
it  is  probable  that  his  complaint  was  not  un- 
founded :  since  in  the  corrected  editions  they 
have  been  expunged,  and  their  place  has  been 
supplied  by  other  additions  taken,  as  it  appears, 
from  the  sixteenth  verse.  The  alteration  I 
think  judicious  :  yet  after  all,  it  gives  us  not  the 
words  of  the  sacred  texts,  but  only  the  conjec- 
tures of  its  Protestant  translators. 

2nd.  We  are  told  in  the  Protestant  version, 
Rom.  iv.  3,  that  Abraham  believed  God  and 
that  it  was  accounted  unto  him  for  righteousness. 
What  is  the  meaning  of  these  last  words,  for 
righteousness  ?  Do  they  not  imply  the  same  as 
instead  of  righteousness  ?  Such,  at  least,  is  the 
rendering,  and  the  explication  of  Bezv,  the 
master  of  our  translators  :  pro  justitia,  i.  e.  vice 
et  loco  justitiaR.  Now  I  appeal  to  any  man  ac- 
quainted with  the  Greek  and  Hebrew  languages, 
whether  such  can  be  the  meaning  either  of  St. 
Paul,  kti>yio6i]  uTva  lio  <5jxo»oaiu'?;v,  or  of  the 
writer  of  Genesis  from  whom  the  Apostle  quotes, 

3rd.  In  Ephes.  i.  G,  the  Apostle  says  that 
God  IxocQiTOJO-ftv  r^uaq  iv  TO)  i]yanr]fxeva.  Ward 
has  made  it  sufficiently  clear  from  the  ancient 
Greek  writers,  that  exuQlT0>aev  means,  has  made 
us  agreeable  or  pie  sing  in  his  eyes.  The  Pro- 
testant translators  have  rendered  it,  has  made  us 
accepted.  At  first  sight  it  may  perhaps  appear 
that  the  two  renderings  are  nearly  alike  ;  but  a 
closer  inspection  will  discover  that  the  former  is 
adverse,  the  latter  favourable  to  the  doctrine  of 
imputative  justice.  Ward  then  was  probably 
accurate  in  attributing  this  rendering  to  the  pre- 
judices of  the  translators  in  favor  of  their  own 
opinion. 

4th.  The  false  translation  of  2  Cor.  v.  21, 
is  corrected  in  the  more  modern  Bibles.  Who- 
ever consults  Ward  will  see  what  unjustifiable 
liberties  the  original  translators  took  with  their 
text.  But  on  this  head  Dr.  Ryan  is  silent.  He 
would  fain  persuade  his  readers,  it  is  of  the  pre- 
sent and  not  of  the  ancient  version  that  Ward 
complains.  Such  artifices  are  unworthy  of  a  wri- 
ter, who  is  convinced  of  the  goodness  of  his  cause. 

5th.  The  two   remaining  texts,  Dan.  vi.  22  ; 


Rom.  iv.  6,  are  noticed  by  Ward  principally  as 
instances  of  the  horror  which  the  reformers 
seems  to  have  entertained  for  the  word  justice. 
That  they  might  not  pollute  their  pages  with 
such  a  term,  they  have  inserted  innocency  in  the 
former,  and  righteousness  in  the  latter  passage. 


PROTESTANT  TRANSLATIONS 
IN   FAVOUR   OF   THE 

SUFFICIENCY  OF  FAITH  ALONE. 

This  section,  like  most  others,  offered  Dr. 
Ryan  a  subject  of  imaginary  triumph.  Out  of 
the  six  corrupt  renderings  noticed  by  Ward,  he 
boasts  that  four  have  been  corrected  in  the  later 
editions  of  the  Bible.  He  must  be  a  weak  adver- 
sary indeed,  who  can  envy  him  such  a  triumph. 
I  shall  therefore  proceed  to  the  two  remaining 
texts. 

Among  the  separatists  from  the  Church  of 
Rome  at  the  period  of  the  reformation,  no  less 
than  among  the  separatists  from  the  Church  of 
England  at  the  present  day,  it  was  a  favourite 
doctrine,  that  justification  by  faith  consisted  in  a 
full  assurance  of  salvation.  Whoever  could  work 
in  himself  this  conviction,  was  secure  of  future 
happiness.  His  assurance  was  infallible;  it  would 
preserve  him  from  ever  falling,  so  as  to  forfeit  his 
claim  to  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  Among  the 
texts  adduced  in  favour  of  this  opinion  was  that 
of  the  epistle  in  the  Hebrews,  x.  22,  with  this 
difference,  that  former  fanatics  could  only  appeal 
to  the  assurance  of  faith  of  the  ancient  Protestant 
version,  while  modern  fanatics  may  appeal  to  the 
full  assurance  of  faith  of  the  present  amended 
edition.  But  does  the  original  text,  ev  nhjoocpoux. 
nTOTewa,  warrant  such  a  rendering  1  1  have  no 
hesitation  in  asserting,  that  it  does  not,  and  I 
found  my  assertion  on  the  authority  of  those  who 
could  not  have  been  ignorant  of  the  true  meaning 
of  the  Greek  language,  the  ancient  doctors  of 
the  Greek  Church.  By  these  the  nltjQocpoQia 
niazso)a  is  said  to  be,  a  full  and  perfect  faith,  a 
faith  that  believes  without  doubting  whatever 
God  has  revealed.  Tavia,  says  Theodoret,  ijtwo- 
i/eiy  niorevovTEO,  xtxt  notaav  dixovoiav  xr\a  ipv/tjcr 
e^oQi^ot'isa.  Tino  yao  nl^QOcpogiav  ExaXEoev.^a) 
It  is,  according  to  Theophylact,  tiiotio  nsnX^^w- 
fisvy  xcu  aduTTctxiog.  (6) 

The  last  text  is  Luke  xviii.  43,  Thy  faith 
hath  saved  thee,  instead  of  hath  made  thee  whole. 
That  this  is  a  false  rendering,  is  acknowledged. 
I  shall  therefore  only  ask,  why  it  was  first  in- 
serted in  the  original  version,  and  why  it  is  still 
preserved  in  the  corrected  edition  ? 


PROTESTANT   TRANSLATIONS 

AGAINST 

APOSTOLICAL  TRADITIONS. 

On  this  subject  I  shall  be  content  to  refer  the 
reader  to  the  Errata,  No.  XVI.,  where  he  will  see 

(a)  Theod.  inEp.  adHeb.,c.  x.   (*)  Theod.  in  eund.  loc. 


PREFACE    TO    THE    FOURTH    EDITION'. 


13 


what  reasons  Ward  had  for  censuring  the  Protes- 
tant translators  ;  and  shall  only  notice  Dr. 
Ryan's  artifice  in  attempting  to  persuade  us,  that 
two  of  the  five  texts  condemned  by  his  adversary 
"  agree  with  the  Popish  translation."  What 
then  !  did  Ward  accuse  the  Protestants  of  mis- 
translating, when  they  translated  in  the  same 
sense  as  the  Rhemish  divines  ?  No  such  thing, 
Dr.  Ryan  meant  to  say,  that  the  ancient  ren- 
dering of  the  Protestant  Bible  in  these  two  pas- 
sages was  so  evidently  false,  that  it  has  since 
been  corrected  according  to  the  Catholic  trans- 
lation. Had  he  said  this,  he  would  have  said  the 
truth. 


MISCELLANEOUS  CHARGES. 

On  this  head  I  shall  notice  the  principal 
passages.  It  would  fatigue  the  patience  of  the 
reader  to  go  through  them  all. 

On  marriage.  "  In  the  Popish  version," 
says  Dr.  Ryan,  "  we  read,  this  is  a  great  sacra- 
ment :  in  ours,  this  is  a  great  mystery.  (Eph.  v. 
22.)  Ward  allows  that  the  word  signifies  mystery 
in  Greek,  and  in  Latin  sacrament :  surely  then 
we  are  not  chargeable  with  mistranslation. "(a) 
Never  perhaps  was  there  a  more  intrepid  writer 
than  Dr.  Ryan  ;  never  one  who  cared  less  for 
detection,  or  trusted  more  to  the  credulity  of 
his  readers.  Does  Ward  then  condemn  the 
words,  this  is  a  great  mystery,  as  a  false  transla- 
tion ?  On  the  contrary,  he  approves  of  it  as  a 
true  one.  But  he  condemned  the  original 
Protestant  rendering,  this  is  a  great  secret  ;  a 
rendering  so  very  faulty  that  Dr.  Ryan  was 
ashamed  to  notice  it,  and  therefore  endeavoured, 
by  calumniating  his  adversary,  to  keep  it  agrcat 
secret. 

On  prayers  in  an  unknown  tongue.  In 
1  Cor.  xiv.  the  Protestant  translators  have 
added  the  epithet  unknown  in  five  different  pas- 
sages ;  and  in  answering  this  charge,  Dr.  Ryan 
very  adroitly  becomes  the  assailant,  and  accuses 
the  Catholic  translators  of  having  omitted  it  in 
the  same  passages.  What  then  1  Does  it  occur 
in  the  original  ?  No  ;  but  it  is  necessary  to 
complete  the  sense.  So  Dr.  Ryan  may  think ; 
but  the  apostle  thought  otherwise.  He  did  not 
insert  it ;  and  if  he  did  not,  I  cannot  conceive 
whence  any  translator  can  derive  authority  to 
insert  it  for  him.  If  you  will  have  the  people  to 
study  their  faith  in  the  scriptures,  let  them  at 
least  have  the  scriptures  as  they  were  originally 
written.  Let  the  stream  flow  to  them  pure  from 
its  source,  without  the  admixture  of  foreign 
matters. 

With  respect  to  the  texts,  1  Cor.  xiii.  ;  1  Cor. 
i.  10  ;  and  1  Tim.  iii.  6,  Ward's  charges  are 
directed  against  the  ancient  Protestant. version  ; 
and  Dr  Ryan  charges  him  with  misrepresenta- 
tion because  these  passages  are  corrected  in  the 
modern  amended  editions  !    ! 

James  i.  13.  Let  no  man  say,  that  he  is 
tempted  of  God :  for   God  is  not  a  tempter  of 

(a)  Anal.,  p.  40. 
3 


evil :  and  he  tempteth  no  man.  Instead  of  this 
the  Protestant  version  reads,  for  God  cannot  be 
tempted  with  evil.  Dr.  Ryan  has  the  modesty 
to  assert  that  these  two  constructions  are  nearly 
the  same !  (b) 


CONCLUSION. 

Dr.  Ryan  has  repeatedly  challenged  he  "  Po- 
pish clergy"  to  reply  to  his  analysis  :  he  cannot 
be  offended  that  I  have  accepted  the  invitation. 
If  in  the  cause  of  my  reply,  I  have  shown  that 
he  has  often  adopted  artifices  unworthy  a 
scholar  and  a  divine  ;  that  he  was  frequently 
misrepresented,  and  still  more  frequently  con- 
cealed the  arguments  of  his  adversary,  the  blame 
must  attach  not  to  me,  but  to  himself.  He 
volunteered  in  the  controversy  :  he  must  be  an- 
swerable for  the  manner  in  which  he  has  con- 
ducted the  contest. 

Besides  those  parts  of  the  Analysis  which  I 
have  noticed,  Dr.  Ryan  has  offered  some  argu- 
ments respecting  the  Lambeth  Register,  and 
added  answers  to  Ward's  queries.  AVith  these 
I  have  no  concern.  My  only  object  was  to 
refute  his  remarks  with  respect  to  the  Protestant 
version  of  the  scriptures.  As,  however,  it  would 
be  uncivil  to  take  my  leave  without  replying  to 
these  queries,  which  he  has  placed  at  the  end 
of  his  pamphlet,  I  shall  endeavour  to  do  it  as 
concisely  and  as  satisfactorily  as  I  can. 

The  three  first  queries  ask,  how  the  Vulgate 
can  be  an  infallible  standard  for  other  transla- 
tions ?  I  answer,  that  the  Vulgate  is  a  version 
deservedly  of  high  authority,  but  I  never  yet 
met  with  a  Catholic  who  considered  it  as  infal- 
lible. 

Q.  IV.  Is  the  translation  of  the  Bible  respon- 
sible for  the  errors  or  excesses  of  Beza,  or 
others,  who  had  no  hand  in  any  of  our  versions  ? 

A.  It  is  not.  Nor  does  Ward  say  it  is.  But 
many  of  the  first  translators  were  the  pupils  of 
Calvin  and  Beza,  and  it  was  not  irrelevant  to 
trace  in  the  work  of  the  masters  the  errors  of 
their  disciples. 

Q.  V.  Did  the  Protestant  Churches  ever  pre- 
tend to  be  infallible  in  these  translations  or  other- 
wise ? 

A.  I  know  not  whether  they  did  or  not.  But 
this  I  know,  they  ought  to  have  done  so. 
Whence  can  a  Protestant  ignorant  of  the  origi- 
nal languages,  derive  the  knowledge  of  the 
Christian  faith,  but  from  the  translation  of  the 
Bible  ?  If  then,  that  translation  be  fallible, 
or  manifestly  erroneous,  how  can  he  have  any 
security  that  his  faith  be  true  ?  Built  on  an 
unsafe  foundation,  it  can  never  acquire  stability. 
The  translation  of  the  Bible  must  be  infallible, 
or  at  least  authentic,  or  the  Protestant  in 
question  must  always  live  in  uncertainty. 

Q.  VI.  Did  not  the  translators  of  the  Bible 
of  the  year  1683  correct  forty  errors  in  our  old 
ones  1 

A.  The  reformers  of  the  old  Protestant  trans- 

(6)  Anal.,  p.  42. 


14 


PREFACE    TO    THE    FOURTH     EDITION. 


lations  did  correct  forty  errors,  and  should  have 
corrected  forty  more. 

Q.  VII.  Having  adopted  the  very  words  of 
the  Popish  English  Bible  in  very  many  in- 
stances, is  it  fair  to  charge  them  in  every  page 
with  malice,  design,  and  misinterpretation? 

A.  Ward  does  not  often  charge  them  with 
malice,  design,  and  misinterpretation.  His 
charges  are  principally  levelled  against  the  ori- 
ginal translators.  He  approves  in  many  places 
of  the  conduct  of  the  reformers  of  the  Protes- 
tant version  ;  in  some  he  condemns  them,  I  fear, 
justly. 

Q.  VIII.  It  always  proves  a  bad  cause  to 
represent  an  opponent's  argument  as  weaker 
than  it  is.  Show  where  I  exhibit  Ward's  objec- 
tions as  less  strong  than  they  are  ? 

A.  In  every  division  almost  without  exception. 
This  I  think  I  have  sufficiently  proved  in  the 
preceding  pages. 

Q.  IX.  According  to  Ward,  the  apostles  had 
a  Christian  doctrine,  a  rule  of  faith,  before  the 
New  Testament  was  written  ;  prove  that  they 
had  it  ? 

A.  If  by  a  ride  of  faith  Dr.  Ryan  means  the 
thirty-nine  Articles,  I  do  not  believe  that  the 
apostle  had  them  either  before  the  scripture  was 
written  or  afterwards.  But  of  this  I  am  sure, 
that  before  the  scripture  was  written  the  apos- 
tles preached  the  Christian  doctrine,  and  estab- 
lished   churches  in  which    it  was    taught.      I 


humbly  conceive  that  they  must  have  had  a 
knowledge  of  it,  and  have  imparted  that  know- 
ledge to  their  disciples. 

Q.  X.  Will  not  the  Greek  professor  at  May- 
nooth  admit  that  the  word  Icpanal  signifies  once 
for  all  1 

A.  As  I  have  not  the  honour  to  be  acquainted 
with  the  Greek  professor  at  Maynooth,  I  am 
unable  to  answer  the  question. 

Qs.  XL  XII.  XIII.  XV.  regard  the  meaning 
of  Greek  words.  For  answer  I  must  request 
the  reader  to  consult  the  preceding  pages. 

Q.  XIV.  Was  it  not  more  decent  in  an 
apostle  to  lead  about  a  wife  than  a  strange 
woman  ? 

A.  I  do  not  see  how  he  could,  unless  he  were 
married.  Our  blessed  Redeemer  was  often 
attended  by  holy  women  of  his  kindred  ;  why 
might  not  an  apostle  also  1 

Q.  XVI.  The  word  naQamoi\u6.  signifies  fault 
as  well  as  sin.  The  Romanists  render  it  sin  : 
why  may  we  not  render  it  fault  without  being 
guilty  of  misconstruction  1 

A.  I  see  no  great  sin  in  rendering  notQqnio)fi& 
fault,  nor  any  great  fault  in  rendering  it  sin. 

Q.  XVII.  Did  not  Adrian  IV.  grant  Ireland 
to  Henry  II.,  and  did  not  Alexander  IV.  confirm 
that  grant  ? 

A.  Did  not  Dr.  Ryan  undertake  to  refute 
the  "  Errata,"  and  has  he  not  failed  in  almost 
every  point  1 


THE  AUTHOR'S  PREFACE. 


.  Among  the  many  and  irreconcileable  differ- 
ences between  Roman  Catholics  and  the  secta- 
ries of  our  days,  those  about  the  holy  scriptures 
claim  not  the  least  place  on  the  stage  of 
controversy :  as,  firstly,  whether  the  Bible  is  the 
sole  and  only  rule  of  faith  ?  Secondly,  whether 
all  things  necessary  to  salvation  are  contained 
in  the  Bible  1  Or,  whether  we  are  bound  to 
believe  some  things,  as  absolutely  necessary  to 
salvation,  which  are  either  not  clear  in  scripture, 
or  not  evidently  deduced  out  of  scripture  ? 
Thirdly,  whether  every  individual  person,  of 
sound  judgment,  ought  to  follow  his  own  private 
interpretation  of  the  scripture  ?  If  so,  why  one 
party  or  profession  should  condemn,  persecute, 
and  penal-law  another,  for  being  of  that  per- 
suasion he  finds  most  agreeable  to  the  scripture, 
as  expounded  according  to  his  own  private 
spirit  ?  If  not,  to  what  interpreter  ought  they 
to  submit  themselves,  and  on  whom  may  they 
safely  and  securely  depend,  touching  the  exposi- 
tion and  true  sense  and  meaning  of  the  same  ? 
Fourthly,  whence  have  we  the  scripture  ?  That 
is,  who  handed  it  down  to  us  from  the  Apostles, 
who  wrote  it  ?  And  by  what  authority  we 
receive  it  for  the  Word  of  God  ?  And,  whether 
we  ought  not  to  receive  the  sense  and  true 
meaning  of  the  scripture,  upon  the  same  author- 
ity we  receive  the  letter  1  For  if  Protestants 
think,  the  letter  was  safe  in  the  custody  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church,  from  which  they 
received  it,  how  can  they  suspect  the  purity  of 
that  sense,  which  was  kept  and  delivered  to 
them  by  the  same  church  and  authority  ?  With 
several  other  such  like  queries,  frequently 
proposed  by  Catholics  ;  and  never  yet,  nor  ever 
likely  to  be,  solidly  answered  by  any  sectaries 
whatever. 

It  is  not  the  design  of  this  following  treatise 
to  enter  into  these  disputes  ;  but  only  to  show 
thee,  Christian  reader,  that  those  translations 
of  the  Bible,  which  the  English  Protestant 
clergy  have  made  and  presented  to  the  people 
for  their  only  rule  of  faith,  are  in  many  places 
not  only  partial,  but  false,  and  disfigured  with 
several  corruptions,  abuses,  and  falsifications,  in 
derogation  to  the  most  material  points  of  Cath- 
olic doctrine,  and  in  favour  and  advantage  of 
their  own  erroneous  opinions  :  for, 

As  it  has  been  the  custom  of  heretics  in  all 
ages,  to  pretend  to  scripture  alone  for  their 
rule,  and  to  reject  the  authority  of  God's  holy 
church  ;  so  has  it  also  ever  been  their  practice 


to  falsify,  corrupt,  and  abuse  the  same  in  divers 
manners. 

1.  One  way  is,  to  deny  whole  books  thereof, 
or  parts  of  books,  when  they  are  evidently 
against  them :  so  did,  for  example,  Ebion 
all  St.  Paul's  epistles  ;  Manicheus  the  Acts  of 
the  Apostles  ;  Luther  likewise  denied  three 
of  the  four  Gospels,  saying,  that  St.  John's  is 
the  only  true  gospel  ;  and  so  do  our  English 
Protestants  those  books  which  they  call  the 
Apocrypha. 

2.  Another  way  is,  to  call  in  question  at  the 
least,  and  make  some  doubt  of  the  authority  of 
certain  books  of  holy  scriptures,  thereby  to 
diminish  their  credit :  so  did  Manicheus  affirm, 
that  the  whole  New  Testament  was  not  written 
by  the  Apostles,  and  particularly  St.  Matthew's 
Gospel :  so  did  Luther  discredit  the  Epistle  of 
St.  James  :  so  did  Marcion  and  the  Arians  deny 
the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  to  be  St.  Paul's  ;  in 
which  they  were  followed  by  our  first  English 
Protestant  translators  of  the  Bible,  who  pre- 
sumed to  strike  St.  Paul's  name  out  of  the  very 
title  of  the  said  Epistle. («) 

3.  Another  way  is,  to  oxpound  the  scripture 
according  to  their  own  private  spirit,  and  to 
reject  the  approved  sense  of  the  ancient  holy 
Fathers,  and  Catholic  Church  :  so  do  all  here- 
tics, who  seem  to  ground  their  errors  upon  the 
scriptures ;  especially  those,  who  will  have 
scripture,  as  by  themselves  expounded,  for  their 
only  rule  of  faith. 

4.  Another  way  is,  to  alter  the  very  origi- 
nal text  of  the  holy  scriptures,  by  adding  to,  di- 
minishing, and  changing  it  here  or  there  for  their 
purpose  :  so  did  the  Arians,  Ncstorians,  &c.  and 
also  Marcion,  who  is  therefore  called  Mus 
Ponticus,  from  his  gnawing,  as  it  were,. certain 
places  with  his  corruptions  ;  and  for  the  same 
reason  may  Beza  not  improperly  be  called,  the 
Mouse  of  Geneva. 

5.  Another  way  not  unlike  this,  is  to  make 
corrupt  and  false  translations  of  the  scriptures 
for  the  maintenance  of  their  errors  :  so  did  the 
Arians  and  Pelagians  of  old,  and  so  have  the 
pretended  reformers  of  our  days  done,  which 
I  intend  to  make  the  subject  of  this  following 
treatise. 

Yet,  before  I  proceed  any  further,  let  me 
first  assure  my  reader,  that  this  work  is  not 
undertaken  with   any  design  of  lessening  the 

(o)  See  Bibles  J  579,  1580. 


16 


THE   AUTHOR  8'  l'KEFACE. 


credit  or  authority  of  the  Holy  Bible,  as  perhaps 
some,  may  be  ready  to  surmise  :  for  indeed,  it 
is  a  common  exclamation  among  our  adversaries, 
especially  such  of  them  as  one  would  think 
should  have  a  greater  respect  for  truth,  that 
Catholics  make  light  of  the  written  Word  of 
God  :  that  they  undervalue  and  condemn  the 
sacred  scriptures  :  that  they  endeavour  to  lessen 
the  credit  and  authority  of  the  Holy  Bible. 
Thus  possessing  the  poor  deluded  people  with 
an  ill  opinion  of  Catholics,  as  if  they  rejected, 
and  trod  under  feet,  the  written  Word  :  where- 
as it  is  evident  to  all,  who  know  them,  that  none 
can  have  a  greater  respect  and  veneration  for 
the  holy  scripture  than  Catholics  have,  receiving, 
reverencing,  and  honouring  the  same,  as  the 
very  pure  and  true  Word  of  God  ;  neither  re- 
jecting, nor  so  much  as  doubting  of  the  least 
tittle  in  the  Bible,  from  the  beginning  of 
Genesis,  to  the  end  of  the  Revelations  ;  several 
devout  Catholics  having  that  profound  venera- 
tion for  it,  that  they  always  read  it  on 
their  knees  with  the  greatest  humility  and  rev- 
erence imaginable,  not  enduring  to  see  it  pro- 
faned in  any  kind  ;  nor  so  much  as  to  see  the 
least  torn  leaf  of  a  Bible  put  to  any  manner  of 
unseemly  use.  Those  who,  besides  all  this, 
consider  with  what  very  indifferent  behaviour 
the  scripture  is  ordinarily  handled  among  Pro- 
testants, will  not,  I  am  confident,  say  that 
Catholics  have  a  less  regard  for  it,  than  Pro- 
testants ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  a  far  greater. 

Again,  dear  reader,  if  thou  findest  in  any  part 
of  this  treatise,  that  the  nature  of  the  subject 
has  extorted  from  me  such  expressions  as  may, 
perhaps,  seem  either  spoken  with  too  much  heat, 
or  not  altogether  so  soft  as  might  be  wished  for  ; 
yet,  let  me  desire  thee  not  to  look  upon  them  as 
the  dictates  of  passion,  but  rather  as  the  just  re- 
sentments of  a  zealous  mind,  moved  with  the 
incentive  of  seeing  God's  sacred  word  adul- 
terated and  corrupted  by  ill-designing  men,  on 
purpose  to  delude  and  deceive  the  ignorant  and 
unwary  reader. 

The  holy  scriptures  were  written  by  the  Pro- 
phets, Apostles,  and  Evangelists  ;  the  Old  Tes- 
tament in  Hebrew,  except  only  some  few  parts  in 
Chaldee  and  Syriac  ;  the  greater  part  of  the 
New  Testament  was  written  in  Greek,  St. 
Matthew's  Gospel  in  Hebrew,  and  St.  Mark's 
in  Latin.  We  have  not  at  this  day  the  original 
writings  of  these  Prophets  and  Apostles,  nor  of 
the  seventy  interpreters,  who  translated  the  Old 
Testament  into  Greek,  about  300  years  before 
the  coming  of  Christ ;  we  have  only  copies  ;  for 
the  truth  and  exactness  whereof  we  must  rely 
upon  the  testimony  and  tradition  of  the  church, 
which  in  so  important  a  point  God  would  never 
permit  to  err  :  so  that  we  have  not  the  least 
doubt,  but  the  copy  authorised  and  approved  of 
by  the  church  is  sufficiently  authentic.  For 
what  avails  it  for  a  Christian  to  believe  that 
scripture  is  the  Word  of  God,  if  he  be  uncertain 
which  copy  and  translation  is  true  ?  Yet,  not- 
withstanding the  necessity  of  admitting  some 
true  authentic  copy,  Protestants  pretend  that 
there  is  none  authentic  in  the  world ;  as  may 


be  seen  in  the  preface  to  the  Tigurine  edition  of 
the  Bible,  and  in  all  their  books  of  controversy  ; 
seeing  therein  they  condemn  the  council  of 
Trent,  for  declaring  that  the  old  translation  is 
authentic,  and  yet  themselves  name  no  other  for 
such.  And,  therefore,  though  the  Lutherans 
fancy  Luther's  translation  ;  the  Calvinists,  that 
of  Geneva  ;  the  Zuinglians,  that  of  Zuinglius  ; 
the  English,  sometimes  one,  and  sometimes 
another  :  yet  because  they  do  not  hold  any  one 
to  be  authentic,  it  follows,  from  their  excep- 
tions against  the  infallibility  of  the  Roman  Ca- 
tholic Church  in  declaring  or  decreeing  a  true 
and  authentic  copy  of  scripture,  and  their  con- 
fession of  the  uncertainty  of  their  own  transla- 
tions, that  they  have  no  certainty  of  scripture  at 
all,  nor  even  of  faith,  which  they  ground  upon 
scripture  alone. 

That,  the  Vulgate  of  the  Latin  is  the  most  true 
and  authentic  copy,  has  been  the  judgment  of 
God's  Church  for  above  those  1300  years  ;  dur- 
ing which  time,  the  Church  has  always  used  it ; 
and  therefore  it  is,  by  the  sacred  council  (a)  of 
Trent,  declared  authentic  and  canonical  in  every 
part  and  book  thereof. 

Most  of  the  Old  Testament,  as  it  is  in  the  said 
Latin  Vulgate,  was  translated  (b)  out  of  Hebrew 
by  St.  Hierom,  or  St.  Jerom  ;  and  the  New-Tes- 
tament had  been  before  his  time  translated  out  of 
Greek,  but  was  by  him  (c)  reviewed  ;  and  such 
faults  as  had  crept  in  by  the  negligence  of  the 
transcribers,  were  corrected  by  him  by  the  ap- 
pointment of  Pope  Damasus.  "  You  constrain 
me,"  says  he,  "  to  make  a  new  work  of  an  old, 
that  I,  after  so  many  copies  of  the  scriptures 
dispersed  through  the  world,  should  sit  as  a 
certain  judge,  which  of  them  agree  with  the  true 
Greek.  I  have  restored  the  New  Testament  to 
the  truth  of  the  Greek,  and  have  translated  the 
old  according  to  the  Hebrew.  Truly,  I  will 
affirm  it  confidently,  and  will  produce  many 
witnesses  of  this  work,  that  I  have  changed 
nothing  from  the  truth  of  the  Hebrew,"  &c.  (b) 

And  for  sufficient  testimony  of  the  sincerity  of 
the  translator,  and  commendations  of  his  trans- 
lation, read  these  words  of  the  great  Doctor  St. 
Augustin  :  "  There  was  not?  wanting,"  says  he, 
"  in  these  our  days,  Hierom,  the  priest,  a  man 
most  learned  and  skilful  in  all  the  three  tongues  ; 
who  not  from  the  Greek,  but  from  the  Hebrew, 
translated  the  same  scriptures  into  Latin,  whose 
learned  labour  the  Jews  yet  confess  to  be 
true."  (e) 

Yea,  the  truth  and  purity  of  this  translation 
is  such,  that  even  the  bitterest  of  Protestants 
themselves  are  forced  to  confess  it  to  be  the 
best,  and  to  prefer  it  before  all  others,  as  also 
to  acknowledge  the  learning,  piety,  and  sincerity 
of  the  translator  of  it ;  which  Mr.  Whitaker, 
notwithstanding  his    railing   in  another  place, 

(a)  Con.  Trident.,  Sess.  4. 

(b)  S.  Hierom.  in  lib.  de  Viris  Illustr.  extremo,  et  in 
Prscfat.  librorum  quos  Latinos  fecit. 

(c)  Hier.  Ep.  89.  ad  Aug.,  qucest.  11,  inter  Ep.  Aug. 

(d)  See  his  preface  before  the  New  Testament,  dedica- 
ted to  Pope  Damasus,  and  his  Catalogue  in  fine. 

(e)  S.  Aug.  de  Civit.  Dei.  lib.  18,  c.  43,  et  Ep.  80,  ad 
Hierom  c.  3,  et  lib.  2,  Doct.  Christi,  c.  15. 


THE    AUTHOR  S    PREFACE. 


Yt 


does  in  these  words  :  "  St.  Hierom,  I  reverence  ; 
Damasus,  I  commend ;  and  the  work  I  confess 
to  be  godly  and  profitable  to  the  church."   (a) 

Dr.  Dove  says  thus  of  it :  "  We  grant  it  fit, 
that  for  uniformity  in  quotations  of  places,  in 
schools  and  pulpits,  one  Latin  text  should  be 
used  :  and  we  can  be  contented,  for  the  antiquity 
thereof,  to  prefer  that  (the  Vulgate)  before  all 
other  Latin  books."  (b) 

And  for  the  antiquity  of  it  Dr.  Covel  tells 
us,  "  that  it  was  used  in  the  church  1300  years 
ago :"  not  doubting  to  prefer  that  translation 
before  others,  (c). 

Dr.  Humphrey  frees  St.  Hierom,  both  from 
malice  and  ignorance  in  translating,  in  these 
words  :  "  The  old  interpreter  was  much  addicted 
to  the  propriety  of  the  words,  and  indeed  with 
too  much  anxiety,  which  I  attribute  to  religion, 
not  to  ignorance."  (</) 

In  regard  of  which  integrity  and  learning, 
Molinoeus  signifies  his  good  esteem  thereof, 
saying,  (e)  "  I  cannot  easily  forsake  the  vulgar 
and  accustomed  reading,  which  also  I  am  accus- 
tomed earnestly  to  defend  :"  "  Yea,  (/)  I  prefer 
the  vulgar  edition,  before  Erasmus's,  Bucer's, 
Bullinger's,  Brentius's,  the  Tigurine  transla- 
tion ;  yea,  before  John  Calvin's,  and  all  others." 
How  honourably  he  speaks  of  it !     And  yet, 

Conradus  Pellican,  a  man  commended  by 
Bucer,  Zuinglius,  Melancthon,  and  all  the  fa- 
mous Protestants  about  Basil,  Tigure,  Berne, 
<fcc,  gives  it  a  far  higher  commendation,  in 
these  words  :  (g)  "  I  find  the  vulgar  edition  of 
the  Psalter  to  agree  for  the  sense,  with  such 
dexterity,  learning,  and  fidelity  of  the  Hebrew, 
that  I  doubt  not,  but  the  Greek  and  Latin  inter- 
preter was  a  man  most  learned,  most  godly,  and 
of  a  prophetical  spirit."  Which  certainly  are 
the  best  properties  of  a  good  translator. 

In  fine,  even  Beza  himself,  one  of  the  great- 
est of  our  adversaries,  affords  this  honourable 
testimony  of  our  vulgar  translation  :  "  I  con- 
fess," says  he,  <:  that  the  old  interpreter  seems 
to  have  interpreted  the  holy  books  with  won- 
derful sincerity  and  religion.  The  vulgar 
edition  I  do,  for  the  most  part,  embrace  and  pre- 
fer before  all  others  "  (h) 

You  see,  how  highly  our  Vulgate  in  Latin  is 
commended  by  these  learned  Protestants  :  see 
likewise,  how  it  has  been  esteemed  by  the  an- 
cient (i)  Fathers  ;  yet,  notwithstanding,  all  this  is 
not  sufficient  to  move  Protestants  to  accept  or 
acquiesce  in  it ;  and  doubtless  the  very  reason 
is,  because  they  would  have  as  much  liberty  to 
reject  the  true  letter,  as  the  true  sense  of  scrip- 
tures, their  new  doctrines  being  condemned  by 
both.     For  had  they  allowed  any  one  translation 

(a)  Whitaker  in  his  Answer  to  Reynolds,  p.  241. 

(b)  Dove's  Persuasion  to  Recusants,  p.  16. 

(c)  See  Dr.  Covel's  Answer  to  Burges,  pp.  91,  94. 
(«')  Dr.  Hum.  de  Ratione  Interp.,  lib.  1.  pp.  74. 
(e)  Molin.  in  Nov.  Test..  Part.  30, 

(/)  Et  in  luc.  17. 

(g)  Pellican  in  Prafat.  in  Psalter.    An  1584. 

(ft) Beza  in  Annot.  in  Luc.i.  1 .  Et  in  Praefat.  Nov.  Test. 

(i)  S.  Hierom  et  St.  Aug.supr.;  St.  Greg.,  lib.  70.;  Mor. 
c.  23.  ;  Istdor.,  lib.  G.  Etyrn.  c.  5,  7,  et  de  Divin.  Offic. 
lib.  1,  cap.  12  ;  S.  Beda  in  Martyrol.  Cassiod.  21  Inst.  &c.; 


to  have  been  authentic,  they  certainly  could 
never  have  had  the  impudence  so  wickedly  to 
have  corrupted  it,  by  adding,  omitting,  and 
changing,  which  they  could  never  have  pre- 
tended the  least  excuse  for,  in  any  copy  by 
themselves  held  for  true  and  authentic. 

Obj.  But  however,  their  greatest  objection 
against  the  Vulgate  Latin  is,  that  we  ought  ra- 
ther to  have  recourse  to  the  original  languages, 
the  fountains  of  the  Hebrew  and  Greek,  in 
which  the  scriptures  were  written  by  the  Pro- 
phets and  Apostles,  who  could  not  err,  than  to 
stand  to  the  Latin  translations,  made  by  divers 
interpreters,  who  might  err. 

Ans.  Wrhen  it  is  certain,  that  the  originals  or 
fountains  aro  pure,  and  not  troubled  or  corrupt, 
they  are  to  be  preferred  before  translations  : 
but  it  is  most  certain,  that  they  are  corrupted 
in  divers  places,  as  Protestants  themselves  are 
forced  to  acknowledge,  and  as  it  appears  by 
their  own  translations.  For  example,  Ps.  xxii. 
ver.  1 G,  they  translate,  "  They  pierced  my  hands 
and  my  feet :"  whereas,  according  to  the  He- 
brew that  now  is,  it  must  be  read  :  "  As  a  lion, 
my  hands,  and  my  feet;"  which  no  doubt,  is  not 
only  nonsense,  but  an  intolerable  corruption  of 
the  latter  Jews  against  the  passion  of  our  Sa- 
viour, of  which  the  old  authentic  Hebrew  was 
a  most  remarkable  prophecy.  Again,  according" 
to  the  Hebrew,  it  is  read,  (A)  Achaz,  king  of 
Israel ;  which  being  false,  they  in  some  of  their 
first  translations  read,  Achaz,  king  of  Juda,  ac- 
cording to  the  truth,  and  as  it  is  in  the  Greek 
and  Vulgate  Latin.  Yet,  their  Bible  of  1579,  as 
also  their  last  translation,  had  rather  follow  the 
falsehood  of  the  Hebrew  against  their  own 
knowledge,  than  to  be  thought  beholden  to  the 
Greek  and  Latin  in  so  light  a  matter.  Likewise, 
where  the  Hebrew  says,  Zedecias,  Joachin's 
brother,  they  are  forced  to  translate  Zedecias,  his 
father's  brother,  as  indeed  the  truth,  is  according 
to  the  Greek.  (/)  So  likewise  in  another  place, 
where  the  Hebrew  is,  "  He  begat  Azubahis  wife 
and  Jerioth;"  which  they  not  easily  knowing  what 
to  make  of,  translate  in  some  of  their  Bibles,"  He 
begat  Azuba  of  his  wife  Jerioth  ;  and  in  others, 
"  He  begat  Jerioth  of  his  wife  Azuba."  But  with- 
out multiplying  examples,  it  is  sufficiently  known 
to  Protestants,  and  by  them  acknowledged,  how 
-intolerably  the  Hebrew  fountains  and  originals 
'are  by  the  Jews  corrupted  :  amongst  others,  Dr. 
Humphrey  says,  "The  Jewish  superstition,  how 
many  places  it  has  corrupted,  the  reader  may  ea- 
sily find  out  and  judge."  [in)  And  in  another  place, 
"  I  look  not,"  says  he,  "  that  men  should  too 
much  follow  the  Rabbins,  as  many  do ;  for  those 
places,  which  promise  and  declare  Christ  the 
true  Messias,  are  most  filthily  depraved  by 
them."  (n) 

"  The  old  interpreter,"  says  another  Pro- 
testant, "  seems  to  have  read  one  way,  whereas 
the  Jews  now  read  another!  which  I  say,  be- 
cause  I    would   not  have   men   think   this   to 

(it)  2  Chron.  xxviii.  19. 

(I)  4  Kings  xxiv.  17,  19. 

(?/t)  Humph.  1.  1.  de  Rat.  interp.  p.  178. 

(?i)  Lib.  ii.  p.  219. 


1 


THE    AUTHORS    PREFACE. 


have  proceeded  from  the  ignorance  or  slothful- 
ness  of  the  old  interpreter  :  rather  we  have  cause 
to  find  fault  for  want  of  diligence  in  the  antiqua- 
ries, and  faith  in  the  Jews  ;  who,  both  before 
Christ's  coming  and  since,  seem  to  be  less  careful 
of  the  Psalms,  than  of  their  Talmudical  songs."  (a) 

I  would  gladly  know  of  our  Protestant  trans- 
lators of  tbe  Bible,  what  reasons  they  have  to 
tbink  tbe  Hebrew  fountain  they  boast  of  so  pure 
and  uncorrupt,  seeing  not  only  letters  and  sylla- 
bles have  been  mistaken,  texts  depraved,  but 
even  whole  books  of  the  Prophets  utterly  lost 
and  perished  ?  How  many  books  of  the  ancient 
Prophets,  sometime  extant,  are  not  now  to  be 
found  1  We  read  in  the  old  Testament,  of  a 
Liber  bellorum  Domini,  "  The  Book  of  the  Wars 
of  our  Lord  ;  the  Book  of  the  Just  Men 
(Protestants  call  it  the  Book  of  Jasher ;)  the 
Book  of  Jehu  the  son  of  Hanani  ;  the  Books  of 
Semeias  the  Prophet,  and  of  Addo  the  Seer  ; 
and  Samuel  wrote  in  a  book  the  law  of  the 
kingdom,  how  kings  ought  to  rule,  and  laid  it 
up  before  our  Lord  :  and  the  works  of  Solomon 
were  written  in  the  Book  of  Nathan  the  Pro- 
phet, and  in  the  Books  of  Ahias  the  Shilonite, 
and  in  the  Vision  of  Addo  the  Seer."  (b)  With 
several  others,  which  are  all  quite  perished  :  yea, 
and  perished  in  such  time,  when  the  Jews  were 
"  the  peculiar  people  of  God,"  and  when,  of  all 
nations,  "  they  were  to  God  a  holy  nation,  a 
kingly  priesthood :"  and  now,  when  they  are  no 
national  people,  have  no  government,  no  king, 
no  priest,  but  are  vagabonds  upon  the  earth,  and 
scattered  among  all  people  :  may  we  reasonably 
think  their  divine  and  ecclesiastical  books  to  have 
been  so  warily  and  carefully  kept,  that  all  and 
every  part  is  safe,  pure,  and  incorrupt  1  that  every 
parcel  is  sound,  no  points,  tittles,  or  letters  lost, 
or  misplaced,  but  all  sincere,  perfect  and  absolute? 

How  easy  is  it,  in  Hebrew  letters,  to  mistake 
sometimes  one  for  another,  and  so  to  alter  the 
whole  sense  ?  As,  for  example,  this  very  letter 
vau  for:  jod,  (c)  has  certainly  made  disagreement 
in  some  places  ;  as  where  the  Septuagint  read, 
za  xouioo-  fi5  owog  ere  qnuAuifty,  Fortitudinem  meam 
ad  te  custodiam,  "  My  strength  I  will  keep  to 
thee  ;"  which  reading  St.  Hierom  also  followed. 
It  is  now  in  the  Hebrew  3>?.  fortitudinem  ejus, 
"  His  strength  I  will  keep  to  thee."  (d)  Which 
corruptions  our  last  Protestant  translators  fol- 
low, reading,  "  Because  of  his  strength  will  I 
wait  upon  thee  ;"  and  to  make  sense  of  it  they 
add  the  words,  "  because  of,"  and  change  the 
words,  "keep  to"  into  "  wait  upon,"  to  the  great 
perverting  of  the  sense  and  sentence.  A  like 
error  is  that  in  Gen.  iii.  (if  it  be  an  error,  as 
many  think  it  is  none,)  Ipsa  lonteret  caput  tuum, 
for  Ipse  or  Ipsum,  about  which  Protestants  keep 
up  such  a  clamour,  (e) 

As  the  Hebrew  has  been  by  the  Jews  abused 


{a)  Conrad.  Pell.  Tom.  4,  in  Psal.  Ixxxv.  9. 

(b)  Numb.  xxi.  14  ;  Josh.  x.  13  ;  Kings  i.  18 ;  2  Paral. 
XX.  34  ;  xii.  15  ;  1  Kings  x.  25  ;  2  Paral.  ix.  29. 

(c)  "Warn  «in. 

(d)  Psal.  lviii.  10,  in  Prot  Bible  it  is  Paa1.  lix.9. 
(c)  Gen.  iii.  15. 


and  falsified  against  our  blessed  Saviour  Christ 
Jesus,  especially  in  such  places  as  were  manifest 
prophecies  of  his  death  and  passion,  so  likewise 
has  the  Greek  fountain  been  corrupted  by  the 
eastern  heretics,  against  divers  points  of  Chris- 
tian doctrine,  insomuch  that  Protestants  them- 
selves, who  pretend  so  great  veneration  for  it, 
dare  not  follow  it  in  many  places,  but  are  forced 
to  fly  to  our  Vulgate  Latin,  as  is  observed  in 
the  preface  to  the  Rhemish  Testament ;  where 
also  you  may  find  sufficient  reasons  why  our 
Catholic  Bible  is  translated  into  English  rather 
from  the  Vulgate  Latin  than  from  the  Greek. 

To  pass  by  several  examples  of  corruptions 
in  the  Greek  copy,  which  might  be  produced,  I 
will  only,  amongst  many,  take  notice  of  these 
two  following  rash  and  inconsiderate  additions  ; 
first,  John  viii.  59,  after  these  words,  Exivit  e 
lemplo,  "  Went  out  of  the  temple  ;"  are  added, 
Transiens  per  medium  corum,  sic  prceteriit ; 
"  Going  through  the  midst  of  them,  and  so 
passed  by."  (/)  Touching  which  addition,  Beza 
writes  thus :  "  These  words  are  found  in 
very  ancient  copies ;  but  I  think,  as  does  Eras- 
mus, that  the  first  part,  '  going  through  the 
midst  of  them,'  is  taken  out  of  Luke  iv.  30,  and 
crept  into  the  text  by  fault  of  the  writers,  who 
found  that  written  in  the  margin  :  and  that 
the  latter  part,  '  and  so  passed  by,'  was  added 
to  make  this  chapter  join  well  with  the  next. 
And  I  am  moved  thus  to  think,  not  only  because 
neither  Chrysostom  nor  Augustine  (he  might 
have  said,  nor  Hierom)  make  any  mention  of 
this  piece,  but  also,  because  it  seems  not  to 
hang  together  very  probably  ;  for,  if  he  withdrew 
himself  out  of  their  sight,  how  went  he  through 
the  midst  of  them  ?"  &c.  (g)  Thus  Beza  dis- 
putes against  it ;  for  which  cause,  1  suppose,  it 
is  omitted  by  our  first  English  translators,  who 
love  to  follow  what  their  master  Beza  de- 
livers to  them  in  Latin,  though  forsooth  they 
would  have  us  think  they  followed  the  Greek 
most  precisely ;  for  in  their  translations  of  the 
year  1561,  1562,  1577,  1579,  they  leave  it  out, 
as  Beza  does  ;  yet  in  their  Testament  of  1580, 
as  also  in  this  last  translation  (Bible  1683),  they 
put  it  in  with  as  much  confidence,  as  if  it  had 
neither  been  disputed  against  by  Beza,  nor 
omitted  by  their  former  brethren. 

To  this  we  may  also  join  that  piece  which 
Protestants  so  gloriously  sing  or  say  at  the  end 
of  the  Lord's  Prayer,  "  For  thine  is  the  king- 
dom, the  power,  and  the  glory,  for  ever  and  ever, 
Amen,'"  which  not  only  Erasmus  dislikes,  (h) 
but  Bullinger  himself  holds  it  for  a  mere 
patch  sowed  to  the  rest,  "  by,  he  knows  not 
whom;"  (i)  and  allows  well  of  Erasmus's  judg- 
ment, reproving  Laurentius  Valla  for  finding 
fault  with  the  Latin  edition,  because  it  wants  it : 
"  There  is  no  reason,"  says  he,  "  why  Laurentius 
Valla  should  take  the  matter  so  hotly,  as  though 
a  great  part   of  the   Lord's  Prayer  were  cut 


(_/*)  Aie'XQow  <5<<z  jieCH  (inruii  kcu  Trapr)ytv  suuj. 

(g)  Beza  in  Job.  viii.  59. 

(A)  Erasm.  in  Annot. 

(i)  Bullinger,  Decad.  v.  Serm.  5. 


THE    AUTHOR  S    PREFACE. 


19 


away  :  rather  their  rashness  was  to  be  reproved, 
who  durst  presume  to  piece  on  their  toys  unto 
the  Lord's  Prayer." 

Let  not  my  reader  think  that  our  Latin  Vul- 
gate differs  from  the  true  and  most  authentic 
Greek  copies,  which  were  extant  in  St.  Hierom's 
days,  but  only  from  such  as  are  now  extant,  and 
since  his  days  corrupted.  "  How  unworthily," 
says,  Beza,  "  and  without  cause,  does  Erasmus, 
blame  the  old  interpreter,  as  dissenting  from  the 
Greek !  He  dissented,  I  grant,  from  those 
Greek  copies  which  Erasmus  had  gotten  ;  but 
we  have  found  not  in  one  place,  that  the  same 
interpretation  which  he  blames,  is  grounded  on 
Ihe  authority  of  other  Greek  copies,  and  those 
most  ancient :  yea  in  some  number  of  places  we 
have  observed  that  the  reading  of  the  Latin 
text  of  the  old  interpreter,  though  it  agree  not 
sometimes  with  our  Greek  copies,  yet  it  is  much 
more  convenient,  for  tflat  it  seems  to  follow  some 
truer  and  better  copy."  (a) 

Now,  if  our  Latin  Vulgate  be  framed  exactly, 
though  not  to  the  vulgar  Greek  examples  now 
extant,  yet  to  more  ancient  and  perfect  copies  ; 
if  the  Greek  copies  have  many  faults,  errors, 
corruptions,  and  additions  in  them,  as  not  only 
Beza  avouches,  but  as  our  Protestant  translators 
confess,  and  as  evidently  appears  by  their  leav- 
ing the  Greek  and  following  the  Latin,  with  what 
reason  can  they  thus  cry  up  the  fountains  and 
originals,  as  incorrupt  and  pure  ?  With  what 
honesty  can  they  call  us  from  our  ancient  vulgar 
Latin,  to  the  present  Greek,  from  which  them- 
selves so  licentiously  depart  at  pleasure,  to  fol- 
low our  Latin  ?  (b) 

Have  we  not  great  reason  to  think,  that  as 
the  Latin  Church  has  been  ever  more  constant 
in  keeping  the  true  faith  than  the  Greek,  so  it 
has  always  been  more  careful  in  preserving  the 
scriptures  from  corruption  ? 

Let  Protestants  only  consider,  whether  it  be 
more  credible,  that  St.  Ilierom,  one  of  the 
greatest  doctors  of  God's  church,  and  the  most 
skilful  in  the  languages  wherein  the  scripture 
was  written,  who  lived  in  the  primitive  times, 
when  perhaps  some  of  the  original  writings  of 
the  Apostles  were  extant,  or  at  least  the  true 
and  authentic  copies  in  Hebrew  and  Greek 
better  known  than  they  are  now  ;  let  us  then 
consider,  I  say,  whether  is  more  credible,  than 
a  translation  made  or  received  by  this  holy  doc- 
tor, and  then  approved  of  by  all  the  world,  and 
ever  since  accepted  and  applauded  in  God's 
church,  should  be  defective,  false,  or  deceitful  ? 
or  that  a  translation  made  since  the  pretended 
Reformation,  not  only  by  men  of  scandalous, 
and  notoriously  wicked  lives,  but  from  copies 
corrupted  by  Jews,  Arians,  and  other  Greek  here- 
tics, should  be  so  ?  (c) 

In  vain,  therefore,  do  Protestants  tell  us, 
that  their  translations    are  taken  immediately 

(a)  Beza  in  Praefat.  Nov.  Test.,  Anno  1556. 

(b)  See  the  Prsef.  to  the  Rhemish  Testament;  Dr.  Mar- 
tin's Discovery  ;  Reynold's  Refutation  of  Whitaker, 
cap.  xiii. 

(c)  Such  were  Luther,  Calvin,  Beza,  Bucer,  Cranmer, 
Tyndal,  &c. 


from  the  fountains  of  the  Greek  and  Hebrew ; 
so  is  also  our  Latin  Vulgate  ;  only  with  this  dif- 
ference, that  ours  was  taken  from  the  fountains 
when  they  were  clear,  and  by  holy  and  learned 
men,  who  knew  which  were  the  crystal  waters, 
and  true  copies ;  but  theirs  is  taken  from  foun- 
tains troubled  by  broachers  of  heresies,  self- 
interested  and  time-serving  persons  ;  and  after 
that  the  Arians,  and  other  heretics,  had,  I  say, 
corrupted  and  poisoned  them  with  their  false 
and  abominable  doctrines. 

Obj.  2.  Cheminitius  and  others  yet  further 
object,  that  there  are  some  corruptions  found 
in  the  Vulgate  Latin,  viz.,  that  these  words, 
Ipsa  conleret  caput  tuum,  (d)  are  corrupted, 
thereby  to  prove  the  intercession  of  the  Blessed 
Virgin  Mary ;  and  that  instead  thereof,  we 
should  read  Ipsum  conteret  caput  tuum,  seeing  it 
was  spoken  of  the  seed,  which  was  Christ,  as 
all  ancient  writers  teach. 

Ans.  Some  books  of  the  Vulgate  edition  have 
Ipsa,  and  some  others  Ipse  ;  and  though  many 
Hebrew  copies  have  Ipse,  yet  there  want  not 
some  which  have  Ipsa :  and  the  points  being 
taken  away,  the  Hebrew  word  maybe  translated 
Ipsa :  yea  the  holy  fathers  (e)  St.  Augustine, 
St.  Ambrose,  St.  Chrysostom,  St.  Gregory, 
St.  Bede,  &c,  read  it  Ipsa,  and  I  think  we 
have  as  great  reason  to  follow  their  interpreta- 
tion of  it  as  Cheminitius's,  or  that  of  the  Pro- 
testants of  our  days  ;  and  though  the  word  con- 
teret in  the  Hebrew  is  of  the  masculine  gender, 
and  so  should  relate  to  Semen,  which  also  in 
the  Hebrew  is  of  the  masculine  gender,  yet  it  is 
not  rare  in  the  scriptures  to  have  pronouns  and 
verbs  of  the  masculine  gender,  joined  with  nouns 
of  the  feminine,  as  in  Ruth  i.  8  ;  Esther  i.  20  ; 
Eccles.  xii.  5.  The  rest  of  Cheminitius's  cavils 
you  will  find  sufficiently  answered  by  the 
learned  Cardinal  Bellarmine,  lib.  ii.  de  Verb, 
Dei,  cap.  12,  13,  14. 

Again,  Mr.  Whitaker  condemns  us  for  follow- 
ing our  Latin  Vulgate  so  precisely,  as  thereby 
to  omit  these  words,  (/)  "  when  this  corruptible 
shall  have  put  on  incorruption,"  which  are  in  the 
Greek  exemplars,  but  not  in  our  Vulgate  Latin  : 
whence  it  follows  assuredly,  says  he,  "  that 
Hierom  dealt  not  faithfully  here,  or  that  his 
version  was  corrupted  afterwards." 

I  answer  to  this,  with  Dr.  Reynolds,  (g)  that 
this  omission  (if  it  be  any)  could  not  proceed 
from  malice  or  design,  seeing  there  is  no  loss  or 
hindrance  to  any  part  of  doctrine,  by  reading  it 
as  we  read ;  for  the  self-same  thing  is  most 
clearly  set  down  in  the  very  next  lines  before. 
Thus  stand  the  words  :  "  For  this  corruptible, 
must  do  on  incorruption  ;  and  this  mortal,  do  on 
immortality:  and  when  this  (corruptible,  has 
done  on  incorruption,  and  this)  mortal  has  done 

(d)  Gen.  iii. 

(e)  St.  August., lib.  2,  deGen.cont.  Manich  ,c.xviii.l. 
11,  de  Gen.  ad  Literam,  cap.  xxxvi.  ;  St.  Ambr.  lib.  de 
Fu»a  Sseculi,  cap.  vii.;  St.  Chrysost.  in  Horn.  17,  in  Gen 
St.  Greg.  lib.  i.;  Mor.  cap.  xxxviii.;  Beda  et  alii  in  hunc 
locum. 

(/)  1  Cor.  xv.  54. 

(g)  See  Dr.  Reynolds'  Refutation  of  Whitaker's  Re- 
pichension3,  chap.  x. 


THE    AUTHOR  S    PREFACE. 


20 

on  immortality."  Where  you  see  the  words, 
which  I  have  put  down,  inclosed  with  paren- 
thesis, are  contained  most  expressly  in  the  fore- 
going sentence,  which  is  in  all  our  Testaments  ; 
so  that  there  is  no  harm  or  danger  either  to 
faith,  doctrine,  or  manners,  if  it  be  omitted. 

That  it  was  of  old  in  some  Greek  copies,  as 
it  stands  in  our  Vulgate  Latin,  is  evident  by  St. 
Hierom's  translating  it  thus  :  and  why  ought  St. 
Hierom  to  be  suspected  of  unfaithful  dealing,  see- 
ing he  put  the  self-same  words  and  sense  in  the 
next  lines  immediately  preceding?  And  that  it 
was  not  corrupted  since,  appears  by  the  common 
reading  of  most  men,  in  all  after  ages.  St.  Am- 
brose, in  his  commentary  upon  the  same  place 
reads  as  we  do.  So  does  St.  Augustine,  De  Ci- 
vitate  Dei,  cited  by  St.  Bede,  in  his  commentary 
upon  the  same  chapter,  (a)  So  read  also  the  rest 
of  the  Catholic  interpreters,  Haymo,  Anselm,  &c. 

But  if  this  place  be  rightly  considered,  so  far 
is  it  from  appearing  as  done  with  any  design  of 
corrupting  the  text,  that  on  the  contrary,  it  appa- 
rently shows  the  sincerity  of  our  Latin  transla- 
tion ;  for,  as  we  keep  our  text,  according  as  St. 
Hierom  and  the  Church  then  delivered  it ;  so  not- 
withstanding, because  the  said  words  are  in  the 
ancient  Greek  copies,  we  generally  add  them  in 
the  margin  of  every  Latin  Testament  which  the 
church  uses,  as  may  be  seen  in  divers  prints  of 
Paris,  Lovain,  and  other  Universities  :  and  if 
there  be  any  fault  in  our  English  translation,  it 
is  only  that  this  particle  was  not  put  down  in  the 
margin,  as  it  was  in  the  Latin  which  we  followed. 
Sd  that  this,  I  say,  proves  no  corruption,  but 
rather  great  fidelity  in  our  Latin  Testament,  that 
it  agrees  with  St.  Hierom,  and  consequently  with 
the  Greek  copies,  which  he  interpreted,  as  with 
St.  Ambrose,  St.  Bede,  Haymo,  and  St.  Anselm. 

Whether  these  vain  and  frivolous  objections 
are  sufficient  grounds  for  their  rejecting  our 
Vulgate  Latin,  and  flying  to  the  original  (but 
now  impure)  fountains,  I  refer  to  the  judicious 
reader. 

But  now,  how  clear,  limpid,  and  pure  the 
streams  are,  that  flow  from  the  Greek  and  He- 
brew fountains,  through  the  channel  of  Pro- 
testant pens,  the  reader  may  easily  guess  with- 
out taking  the  pains  of  comparing  them,  from 
the  testimonies  they  themselves  bear  of  one  an- 
other's translations. 

Zuinglius  writes  thus  to  Luther,  concerning 
his  corrupt  translation  :  (b)  "  Thou  corruptest 
the  word  of  God,  O  Luther  :  thou  art  seen  to 
be  a  manifest  and  common  corrupter  and  per- 
vcrter  of  the  holy  scripture  ;  how  much  are  we 
ashamed  of  thee,  who  have  hitherto  esteemed 
thee  beyond  all  measure,  and  prove  thee  to  be 
such  a  man !" 

Luther's  Dutch  translation  of  the  old  Testa- 
ment, especially  of  Job  and  the  Prophets,  had 
its  blemishes,  says  Keckerman,  and  those  no 
small  ones,  (c)  neither  are  the  blemishes  in  his 
New  Testament  to  be  accounted  small  ones  ; 

(a)  St.  Beda  in  1  Cor.  c.  xv. 
(ft)  Zuing.  t.  2,  ad  Luth.,  lib.  de  S. 
(c)  Keckerman,  Syst.  8;  Theol.,  lib.  2,  p.  188;  IS. 
Jon.  v.  7. 


one  of  which  is,  his  omitting  and  wholly  leaving 
out  this  text  in  St.  John's  Epistle  :  "  There  be 
three  who  give  testimony  in  heaven  ;  the  Father, 
the  Word,  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  these  three 
are  one."  Again,  in  Rom.  iii.  28,  he  adds  the 
word  "  alone"  to  the  text,  saying,  "  We  account 
a  man  to  be  justified  by  faith  alone,  without  the 
works  of  the  law."  Of  which  intolerable  cor- 
ruption being  admonished,  he  persisted  obstinate 
and  wilful,  saying,  "  So  I  will,  so  I  command  ; 
let  my  will  be  instead  of  reason,"  &c.  (d)  Lu- 
ther will  have  it  so  ;  and  at  last  thus  concludes, 
"  The  word  alone  must  remain  in  my  New  Tes- 
tament ;  although  all  the  Papists  run  mad,  they 
shall  not  take  it  from  thence  :  it  grieves  me, 
that  I  did  not  add  also  those  two  other  words, 
Omnibus  et  omnium,  sine  omnibus  operibus,  om- 
nium legum ;   without  all  works  of  all  laws." 

Again,  in  requital  to  Zuinglius,  Luther  rejects 
the  Zuinglian  translation,  terming  them  in 
matter  of  divinity,  "  fools,  asses,  antichrists,  de- 
ceivers," &c.  (e)  and  indeed,  not  without  cause  ; 
for  what  could  be  more  deceitful  and  anti- 
christian,  than  instead  of  our  Saviour's  words, 
"  this  is  my  body,"  to  translate,  "  this  signifies 
my  body,"  as  Zuinglius  did,  to  maintain  his 
figurative  signification  of  the  words,  and  cry 
down  Christ's  real  presence  of  the  blessed 
sacrament  ? 

When  Froscheverus,  the  Zuinglian  printer 
of  Zurick,  sent  Luther  a  Bible  translated  by  the 
divines  there,  he  would  not  receive  it ;  but  as 
Hospinian  and  Lavatherus  witness,  sent  it  back 
and  rejected  it.  (f) 

The  Tigurine  translation  was,  in  like  manner, 
so  distasteful  to  other  Protestants,  "  that"  the 
Elector  of  Saxony  in  great  anger  rejected  it  and 
placed    Luther's    translation    in    room    there- 

of-"  (g) 

Beza  reproves  the  translation  set  forth  by 
Oecolampadius,  and  the  divines  of  Basil  ; 
affirming,  "  that  the  Basil  translation  is  in  many 
places  wicked,  and  altogether  differing  from  the 
mind  of  the  Holy  Ghost." 

Castalio's  translation  is  also  condemned  by 
(h)  Beza,  as  being  sacrilegious,  wicked,  and 
ethnical ;  insomuch,  that  Castalio  wrote  a  special 
treatise  in  defence  of  it ;  in  the  preface  of  which 
he  thus  complains  :  "  Some  reject  our  Latin 
and  French  translations  of  the  Bible,  not  only 
as  unlearned,  but  also  as  wicked,  and  differing 
in  many  places  from  the  mind  of  the  Holy 
Ghost." 

The  learned  Protestant,  Molinceus,  affirms 
of  Calvin's  translation,  "  that  Calvin  in  his  har- 
mony, makes  the  text  of  the  Gospel  to  leap  up 
and  down  ;  he  uses  violence  to  the  letter  of  the 
Gospel ;  and  besides  this,  adds  to  the  text."  (i) 

(d)  To.  v.  Germ.  fol.  141,  144. 

(e)  See  Zuing.  Tom.  2,  ad  Luth.  lib.  de  Sacr.,fol.388, 
389. 

(/)  Hosp.  Hist.  Sacram.  part.  ult.  fol.  183;  Lavath. 
Hist.  Sacram.  1.  32. 

(g)  Hospin.  in  Concord.  Discord,  fol.  138. 

(h)  In  Respons.  ad  Defens.  et  Respons.  Castal  in 
Test.  1556,  in  Praefat.  et  in  Annot.  in  Mat.  iii.  et  iv.,  Luc. 
ii.;  Act.  viii.  et  x.     1  Cor.  1. 

(i)  In  sua  Translat.  Nov.  Test.  Part.  IS,  fol.  1 10. 


THE    AUTHOR'S    PREFACE. 


And  touching  Beza's  translation,  which  our 
English  especially  follow,  the  same  Molinoeus 
charges  him,  that  "  he  actually  changes  the 
text  ;"  giving  likewise  several  instances  of  his 
corruptions.  Castalio  also,  "  a  learned  Cal- 
vinist,  as  Osiander  says,  "  and  skilful  in  the 
tongues,"  reprehends  Beza  in  a  book  wholly 
written  against  his  corruptions  ;  and  says  further, 
"  I  will  not  note  all  his  errors,  for  that  would 
require  too  large  a  volume. ''(a) 

In  short,  Bucer  and  the  Osianderians  rise  up 
against  Luther  for  false  translations  ;  Luther 
against  Minister ;  Beza  against  Castalio,  and 
Castalio  against  Beza  ;  Calvin  against  Servetus  ; 
lllyricus  against  both  Calvin  and  Beza.  (6) 
Staphylus  and  Emserus  noted  in  Luther's  Dutch 
translations  of  the  New  Testament  only,  about 
one  thousand  four  hundred  heretical  corrup- 
tions, (c)  And  thus  far  of  the  confessed  cor- 
ruptions in  foreign  Protestant  translators. 

If  you  desire  a  character  of  our  English  Pro- 
testant versions,  pray  be  pleased  to  take  it  from 
the  words  of  these  following  Protestants  ; 
some  of  the  most  zealous  and  precise  of  whom, 
in  a  certain  treatise,  entitled,  "  A  petition  di- 
rected to  his  most  excellent  majesty  King 
James  the  First,"  complain,  "  that  our  transla- 
tion of  the  Psalms,  comprised  in  our  Book  of  Com- 
mon Prayer,  doth,  in  addition,  subtraction,  and 
alteration,  differ  from  the  truth  of  the  Hebrew 
in,  at  least,  two  hundred  places."  If  two  hun- 
dred corruptions  were  found  in  the  Psalms  only, 
and  that  by  Protestants  themselves,  how  many, 
think  you,  might  be  found  from  the  beginning 
of  Genesis,  to  the  end  of  the  Apocalypse,  if  ex- 
amined by  an  impartial  and  strict  examination  ? 
And  this  they  made  the  ground  of  their  scruple, 
to  make  use  of  the  Common  Prayer ;  remain- 
ing doubtful,  "  whether  a  man  may,  with  a 
sale  conscience,  subscribe  thereto  :"  yea,  they 
wrote  and  published  a  particular  treatise,  en- 
titled, "  A  Defence  of  the  Ministers'  Reasons 
for  refusal  of  Subscribing  ;"  the  whole  argument 
and  scope  whereof,  is  only  concerning  mis- 
translating ;  yea,  the  reader  may  see.  in  the 
beginning  of  the  said  book,  the  title  of  every 
chapter,  twenty-six  in  all,  pointing  to  the 
mistranslations    there     handled    in    particular. 

(<0  (0 

Mr.  Carlisle  avouches,  "  that  the  English 
translators  have  depraved  the  sense,  obscured 
the  truth,  and  deceived  the  ignorant :  that  in 
many  places  they  detort  the  scriptures  from  the 
right  sense,  and  that  they  show  themselves  to  love 
darkness  more  than  light  :  falsehood  more  than 
truth."  Which  Doctor  Reynold's  objecting 
against  the  Church  of  England,  Mr.  Whitaker 
had  no  better  answer  than  to  say,  "  What 
Mr.  Carlisle,  with  some  others,  has  written 
against  some  places  translated  in  our  Bibles, 
makes    nothing    to   the    purpose  ;    I    have    not 

(a)  In  Test.  Part.  20, 30, 40, 64,  65,  CO,  71,99,  et  Part.  8, 
13,  14,21,  23. 

(b)  In  Defens.  tians.,p.  HO. 

(c)  See  Lind  Dub.  p.  81,  85,  96,  98. 

(d)  Petition  directed  to  his  Majesty,  p.  75,  76. 

(e)  That  Christ  descended  into  hell, p.  116,  117,118, 
121,  151. 


said  otherwise,  but  that  some  things  may  be 
amended."  (/) 

The  Ministers  of  Lincoln  diocess  could  not 
forbear,  in  their  great  zeal,  to  signify  to  the 
king,  that  the  English  translation  of  the  Bible, 
"  is  a  translation  that  takes  away  from  the  text, 
that  adds  to  the  text,  and  that  sometimes,  to  the 
changing  or  obscuring  of  the  meaning  of  the 
Holy  Ghost ;"  calling  it  yet  further,  "  a  trans- 
lation which  is  absurd  and  senseless,  pervert- 
ing, in  many  places,  the  meaning  of  the  Holy 
Ghost."  (g) 

For  which  cause,  Protestants  of  tender  con- 
sciences made  great  scruple  of  subscribing 
thereto :  "  How  shall  I,"  says  Mr.  Barges* 
"  approve  under  my  hand,  a  translation  which 
hath  so  many  omissions,  many  additions,  which 
sometimes  obscures,  sometimes  perverts  the 
sense  ;  being  sometimes  senseless,  sometimes 
contrary  V  (fi) 

This  great  evil  of  corrupting  the  scripture 
being  well  considered  by  Mr.  Broughton,  one 
of  the  most  zealous  sort  of  Protestants,  obliged 
him  to  write  an  epistle  to  the  Lords  of  the 
Council,  desiring  them  with  all  speed  to  procure 
a  new  translation  :  "  because,"  says  he,  "  that 
which  is  now  in  England  is  full  of  errors."  (i) 
And  in  his  advertisements  of  corruptions,  he 
tells  the  Bishops,  "  that  their  public  translations 
of  scriptures  into  English  is  such,  that  it  per- 
verts the  text  of  the  old  Testament  in  eight 
hundred  and  forty-eight  places,  and  that  it  causes 
millions  of  millions  to  reject  the  New  Testament, 
and  to  run  to  eternal  flames."  A  most  dreadful 
saying,  certainly,  for  all  those  who  are  forced  to  re- 
ceive such  a  translation  for  their  ordy  rule  of  faith. 

King  James  the  First  thought  the  Geneva 
translation  to  be  the  worst  of  all  ;  aid  farther 
affirmed,  "  that  in  the  marginal  notes  annexed 
to  the  Geneva  translation,  some  are  very  partial, 
untrue,  seditious,"  &c.  (A)  Agreeable  to  this  are 
also  these  words  of  Mr.  Parkcs  to  Doctor 
Willet  :  "  As  for  the  Geneva  Bibles,  it  is  to 
be  wished,  that  either  they  were  purged  from 
those  manifold  errors  which  are  both  in  the  text 
and  in  the  margin,  or  else  utterly  prohibited." 

Now  these  our  Protestant  English  transla- 
tions being  thus  confessedly  "  corrupt,  absurd, 
senseless,  contrary,  and  preverting  the  meaning 
of  the  Holy  Ghost ;"  had  not  King  James  the 
First  just  cause  to  affirm,  "  that  he  could  never 
see  a  Bible  well  translated  into  English  ?''  (/) 
And  whether  such  falsely  translated  Bibles 
ought  to  be  imposed  upon  the  ignorant  people, 
and  by  them  received  for  the  very  Word  of 
God,  and  for  their  only  rule  of  faith,  1  refer  to 
the  judgment  of  the  world  ;  and  do  freely  asseit 
with    Doctor    Whitaker,   a   learned   Protestant. 

(/)  Whitaker's  Answer  to  Dr.  Reynolds,  p.  255. 

(i>)  See  the  Abridgment,  which  the  Ministers  of  Lincoln 
Diocess  delivered  to  his  Majesty,  p.  11,  12,  13. 

(A)  Burges  Apol.  Sect.  6,  and  in  Covel's  Ansvei  to 
Binges,  p.  93. 

(/')  See  the  Triple  Cord,  p.  147. 

(A)  Seethe  Conference  before  the  King's  Majesty,  p.  4t>, 
47.  Apologies  concerning  Cbriffs  descent  into  hell  at 
Ddd. 

(I)  Conference  before  his  Majesty,  p.  40. 


22 


THE    AUTHOR  S    PREFACE. 


"  that  translations  are  so  far  only  the  Word  of 
God,  as  they  faithfully  express  the  meaning  of 
the  authentical  text."  (a) 

The  English  Protestant  translations  having 
been  thus  exclaimed  against,  and  cried  down  not 
only  by  Catholics,  but  even  by  the  most  learned 
Protestants,  (b)  as  you  have  seen  ;  it  pleased  his 
majesty,  King  James  the  First,  to  command  a 
review  and  reformation  of  those  translations 
which  had  passed  for  God's  Word  in  King 
Edward  the  Sixth,  and  Queen  Elizabeth's  days, 
(c)  Which  work  was  undertaken  by  the  prelatic 
clergy,  not  so  much,  it  is  to  be  feared,  for  the 
zeal  of  truth,  as  appears  by  their  having  cor- 
rected so  very  few  places,  as  out  of  a  design  of 
correcting  such  faults  as  favoured  the  more 
puritanical  part  of  Protestants  (Presbyterians) 
against  the  usurped  authority,  pretended  episco- 
pacy, ceremonies,  and  traditions  of  the  prelatic 
party.  For  example  :  the  word  "  congregation" 
in  their  first  Bibles,  was  the  usual  and  only 
English  word  they  made  use  of  for  the  Greek 
and  Latin  word  kxxh/crla  ecclesia,  because  then 
the  name  of  church  was  most  odious  to  them  ; 
yea,  they  could  not  endure  to  hear  any  mention 
of  a  church,  because  of  the  Catholic  Church, 
which  they  had  fosaken,  and  which  withstood 
and  condemned  them.  But  now,  being  grown 
up  to  something  (as  themselves  fancy)  like  a 
church,  they  resolve  in  good  earnest  to  take  upon 
them  the  face,  figure,  and  grandeur  of  a  church  ; 
to  censure  and  excommunicate,  yea,  and  perse- 
cute their  disssenting  brethern  ;  rejecting  there- 
fore that  humble  appellation  which  their  primi- 
tive ancestors  were  content  with,  viz.  congrega- 
tion, they  assume  the  title  of  church,  the  Church 
of  England,  to  countenance  which,  they  bring 
the  word  church  again  into  their  translations, 
and  banish  that  their  once  darling  congregation. 

They  have  also,  instead  of  ordinances,  institu- 
tions, &c.  been  pleased  in  some  places  to  trans- 
late traditions  ;  thereby  to  vindicate  several 
ceremonies  of  theirs  against  their  Puritanical 
brethren  ;  as  in  behalf  of  their  character,  they 
rectified,  "  ordaining  elders,  by  election." 

The  word  Image  being  so  shameful  a  cor- 
ruption, they  were  pleased  likewise  to  correct, 
and  instead  thereof  to  translate  Idol  according 
to  the  true  Greek  and  Latin.  Yet  it  appears 
that  this  was  not  amended  out  of  any  good  de- 
sign, or  love  of  truth  ;  but  either  merely  out  of 
shame,  or  however  to  have  it  said  that  they  had 
done  something.  Seeing  they  have  not  cor- 
rected it  in  all  places,  especially  in  the  Old 
Testament,  Exod.  xx.,  where  they  yet  read 
Image,  "  Thou  shalt  not  make  to  thyself  any 
graven  image,"  the  word  in  Hebrew  being  Pesel, 
the  very  same  that  Sculptile  is  in  Latin,  and 
signifies  in  English  a  graven  or  carved  thing  ; 
and  in  the  Greek  it  is  Eidolon  (an  Idol) :  so 
that  by  this  false  and  wicked  practice,  they  en- 
deavour to  discredit  the  Catholic  religion ;  and, 
contrary  to  their  own  consciences,  and   correc- 

(«)  Whitaker's  Answer  to  Dr.  Reynolds,  p.  235. 

(b)  Dr.  Gregory  Martin  wrote  a  whole  Treatise  against 
them 

(e)  Bishop  Tunstal  discovered  in  Tyndal's  New  Testa- 
ment only,  no  less  than  2000  corruptions. 


tions  in  the  New  Testament,  endeavour  to  make 
the  people  believe  that  Image  and  Idol  are  the 
same,  and  equally  forbidden  by  scripture,  and 
God's  commandments  ;  and  consequently,  that 
Popery  is  idolatry,  for  admitting  the  due  use  of 
images. 

They  have  also  corrected  that  most  absurd 
and  shameful  corruption,  grave ;  and,  as  they 
ought  to  do,  have  instead  of  it  translated  hell, 
so  that  now  they  read,  "  Thou  wilt  not  leave  my 
soul  in  hell ;"  whereas  Beza  has  it,  "  Thou  wilt 
not  leave  my  carcase  in  the  grave."  Yet  we 
see,  that  this  is  not  out  of  any  sincere  intention, 
or  respect  to  truth  neither,  because  they  have 
but  corrected  it  in  some  few  places,  not  in  all, 
as  you  will  see  hereafter  ;  which  they  would  not 
do,  especially  in  Genesis,  lest  they  should  there- 
by be  forced  to  admit  of  Liinbus  Patrum,  where 
Jacob's  soul  was  to  descend,  when  he  said,  "  I 
will  go  down  to  my  son  into  hell,  mourning," 
&c.  And  to  balance  the  advantage  they  think 
they  may  have  given  Catholics  where  they  have 
corrected  it,  they  have  (against  purgatory  and 
Limbus  Patrum)  in  other  places  most  grossly 
corrupted  the  text :  for  whereas  the  words  of 
our  Saviour  are,  "  Quickened  in  spirit  or  soul. 
In  the  which  spirit  coming,  he  preached  to  them 
also  that  were  in  prison,"  (d)  they  translate, 
"  Quickened  by  the  spirit,  by  which  also  he  went 
and  preached  unto  the  spirits  in  prison."  This 
was  so  notorious  a  corruption,  that  Dr.  Mon- 
tague, afterwards  Bishop  of  Chichester  and 
Norwich,  reprehended  Sir  Henry  Saville  for  it, 
to  whose  care  the  translating  of  St.  Peter's 
epistle  was  committed ;  Sir  Henry  Saville  told 
him  plainly,  that  Dr.  Abbot,  archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  and  Dr.  Smith,  bishop  of  Glou- 
cester, corrupted  and  altered  this  translation  of 
this  place,  which  himself  had  sincerely  performed. 
Note  here,  by  the  bye,  that  if  Dr.  Abbot's  con- 
science could  so  lightly  suffer  him  to  corrupt  the 
scripture,  his,  or  his  servant  Mason's  forging 
the  Lambeth  Records,  could  not  possibly  cause 
the  least  scruple,  especially  being  a  thing  so 
highly  for  their  interest  and  honour. 

These  are  the  chiefest  faults  they  have  cor 
rected  in  this  their  new  translation  ;  and  with 
what  sinister  designs  they  have  amended  them, 
appears  visible  enough ;  to  wit,  either  to  keep 
their  authority,  and  gain  credit  for  their  new- 
thought-on  episcopal  and  priestly  character  and 
ceremonies  against  Puritans  or  Presbyterians  ; 
or  else,  for  very  shame,  urged  thereto  by  the 
exclamations  of  Catholics,  daily  inveighing 
against  such  intolerable  falsifications-  But 
because  they  resolved  not  to  correct  either  all, 
or  the  tenth  part  of  the  corruptions  of  the  for- 
mer translation  :  therefore,  fearing  their  over 
seen  falsifications  would  be  observed,  both  by 
Puritans  and  Catholics,  in  their  Epistle  Dedi- 
catory to  the  king,  they  desire  his  majesty's  pro- 
tection, for  that  "  on  the  one  side,  we  shall  be 
traduced,"  say  they,  "  by  Popish  persons  at  home 
or  abroad,  who  therefore  will  malign  us,  because 
we  are  poor  instruments  to  make   God's  holy 

(d)  1  Peter  iii.  18,  19. 


THE    AUTHOR  S    PREFACE. 


truth  to  be  yet  more  known  unto  the  people 
whom  they  desire  still  to  keep  in  ignorance  and 
darkness :  on  the  other  side,  we  shall  be  ma- 
ligned by  self-conceited  brethern,  who  run  their 
own  ways,"  &c. 

We  see  how  they  endeavour  here  to  persuade 
the  king  and  the  world,  that  Catholics  are  desi- 
rous to  conceal  the  light  of  the  Gospel :  whereas 
on  the  contrary,  nothing  is  more  obvious,  than 
the  daily  and  indefatigable  endeavours  of  Ca- 
tholic missioners  and  priests,  not  only  in  preach- 
ing and  explaining  God's  holy  word  in  Europe  ; 
but  also  in  forsaking  their  own  countries  and 
inconveniences,  and  travelling  with  great  diffi- 
.culties  and  dangers  by  sea  and  land,  into  Asia, 
Africa,  America,  and  the  Antipodes,  with  no 
other  design  than  to  publish  the  doctrine  of 
Christ,  and  to  discover  and  manifest  the  light  of 
the  Gospel  to  infidels,  who  are  in  darkness  and 
ignorance.  Nor  do  any  but  Catholics  stick  to 
the  old  letter  and  sense  of  scripture,  without 
altering  the  text  or  rejecting  any  part  thereof, 
or  devising  new  interpretations  ;  which  certainly 
cannot  demonstrate  a  desire  in  them  to  keep 
people  in  ignorance  and  darkness.  Indeed,  as 
for  their  self  conceited  Presbyterian  and  fanatic 
brethern,  who  run  their  own  wavs  in  translating 
and  interpreting  scripture,  we  do  not  excuse 
them,  but  only  say,  that  we  see  no  reason  why 
prelatics  should  reprehend  them  for  a  fault, 
whereof  themselves  are  no  less  guilty.  Do  not 
themselves  of  the  Church  of  England  run  their 
own  ways  also  ;  as  well  as  those  other  sectaries 
in  translating  the  Bible  ?  Do  tbcy  slick  to 
either  the  Greek,  Latin,  or  Hebrew  text  ?  Do 
they  not  leap  from  one  language  and  copy  to 
another  ?  accept  and  reject  what  they  please  ? 
Do  they  not  fancy  a  sense  of  their  own,  every 
whit  as  contrary  to  that  of  the  Catholic  and  an- 
cient church,  as  that  of  their  self-conceited  bre- 
thren the  Presbyterians,  and  others,  is  acknow- 
ledged to  be  ?  And  yet  they  are  neither  more 
learned  nor  more  skilful  in  the  tongues,  nor 
more  godly  than  those  they  so  much  contemn 
and  blame. 

All  heretics  who  have  ever  waged  war  against 
God's  holy  church,  whatever  particular  wea- 
pons they  had,  have  generally  made  use  of  these 
two,  viz.,  "  Misrepresenting  and  ridiculing  the 
doctrine  of  God's  church ;"  and,  "  corrupting 
and  misinterpreting  his  sacred  word,  the  holy 
scripture  ;"  we  find  not  any  since  Simon  Magus's 
days,  that  have  ever  been  more  dexterous  and 
skilful  in  handling  these  direful  arms,  than  the 
heretics  of  our  times. 

In  the  first  place,  they  are  so  great  masters 
and  doctors  in  misrepresenting,  mocking,  and 
deriding  religion,  that  they  seem  even  to  have 
solely  devoted  themselves  to  no  other  profession 
or  place,  but  "  Cathedra?,  irrisorum"  the  school 
or  "  chair  of  the  scorner,"  as  David  terms  their 
seat :  which  the  holy  apostle  St.  Peter  foresaw, 
when  he  foretold,  that  "  there  should  come  in 
the  latter  days,  illusores,  scoffers,  walking 
after  their  own  lusts."  To  whom  did  this  pro- 
phecy ever  better  agree,  than  to  the  heretics  of 
our  days,   who  deride   the   sacred   scriptures  ? 


23 

"  The  author  of  the  book  of  Ecclesiastes,"  says 
one  of  them,  "  had  neither  boots  nor  spurs,  but 
rid  on  a  long  stick,  in  begging  shoes."  Who 
scoff  at  the  book  of  Judith  :  compare  the  Ma- 
cabees  to  Robin  Hood,  and  Bevis  of  Southamp- 
ton :  call  Baruch,  a  peevish  ape  of  Jeremy  : 
count  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  as  stubble : 
and  deride  St.  James's,  as  an  epistle  made  of 
straw  :  contemn  three  of  the  four  Gospels. 
What  ridiculing  is  this  of  the  wrord  of  God ! 
Nor  were  the  first  pretended  reformers  only 
guilty  of  this,  but  the  same  vein  has  still  con- 
tinued in  the  writings,  preachings,  and  teachings 
of  their  successors  ;  a  great  part  of  which  are 
nothing  but  a  mere  mockery,  ridiculing,  and 
misrepresenting  of  the  doctrine  of  Christ,  as  is 
too  notorious  and  visible  in  many  scurrilous  and 
scornful  writings  and  sermons  lately  published 
by  several  men  of  no  small  figure  in  our  English 
Protestant  Church.  By  which  scoffing  strata- 
gem, when  they  cannot  laugh  the  vulgar  into  a 
contempt  and  abhorrence  of  the  Christian  reli- 
gion, they  fly  to  their  other  weapons,  to  wit, 
"  imposing  upon  the  people's  weak  understand- 
ing, bv  a  corrupt,  imperfect,  and  falsely  trans- 
lated Bible."  (a) 

Tertullian  complained  thus  of  the  heretics  of 
his  time,  lata  hcr.resis  non  recipit  quasdum  scrip- 
luras,  &c.  "  These  heretics  admit  not  some 
books  of  scriptures  ;  and  those  which  they  do 
admit,  by  adding  to,  and  taking  from,  they  per- 
vert to  serve  their  purpose  ;  and  if  they  receive 
some  books,  yet  they  receive  them  not  entirely  ; 
or  if  they  receive  them  entirely,  after  some  sort 
nevertheless  they  spoil  them  by  devising  divers 
interpretations.  In  this  case,  what  will  you  do, 
who  think  yourselves  skilful  in  scriptures,  when 
that  which  you  defend,  the  adversary  denies  ;  and 
that  which  you  deny,  he  defends  ?"  Et  tu 
quidem  nihil  perdrs  nisi  vocem  de  r.ontentionc, 
nihil  conscqueris  nisi  bilem  de  hlasphematione  : 
"  And  you  indeed  shall  lose  nothing  but  words 
in  this  contention  ;  nor  shall  you  gain  any  thing 
but  anger  from  his  blasphemy."  How  fitly  may 
these  words  be  applied  to  the  pretended  refor- 
mers of  our  days  !  who,  when  told  of  their  abu- 
sing, corrupting,  and  misinterpreting  the  holy 
scriptures,  are  so  far  from  acknowledging  their 
faults,  that  on  the  contrary  they  blush  not  to 
defend  them.  When  Dr.  Martin  in  his  disco- 
very, told  them  of  their  falsifications  in  the 
Bible,  did  they  thank  him  for  letting  them  see 
their  mistakes,  as  indeed  men  endued  with  the 
spirit  of  sincerity  and  honesty  would  have  done  ? 
No,  they  were  so  far  from  that,  that  Fulk,  as 
much  as  in  him  lies,  endeavours  very  obstinately 
to  defend  them:  and  Whitaker  affirms,  that 
"  their  translations  are  well  done."  Why  then 
were  they  afterwards  corrected  1  and  that  all  the 
faults  Dr.  Martin  finds  in  them  are  but  trifles : 
demanding  what  is  there  in  their  Bibles  that  can 
be  found  fault  with,  as  not  translated  well  and 
truly  1  (b)  Such  a  pernicious,  obstinate,  and 
contentious  spirit,  are  heretics  possessed  with, 

(a)  Dr.  St ,  Dr.  S.,  Dr.  T.,  Mr.  W.,  &c. 
(£)  Whitaker,  p.  14. 


24 

which  indeed  is  the  very  thing  that  renders  them 
heretics  ;  for  with  such  I  do  not  rank  those'  in 
the  list,  who,  though  they  have  even  with  their 
first  milk,  as  I  may  say,  imbibed  their  errors, 
and  have  been  educated  from  their  childhood  in 
erroneous  opinions,  yet  do  neither  pertinaciously 
adhere  to  the  same,  nor  obstinately  resist  the 
truth,  when  proposed  to  them  ;  but  on  the  con- 
trary, are  willing  to  embrace  it. 

How  many  innocent,  and  well-meaning  people, 
are  there  in  England,  who  have  scarcely  in  all 
their  life-time,  ever  heard  any  mention  of  a 
Catholic,  or  Catholic  religion,  unless  under 
these  monstrous  and  frightful  terms  of  idolatry, 
superstition,  antichristianism,  &c.  1  How  many 
have  ever  heard  a  better  character  of  Catholics, 
than  bloody-minded  people,  thirsters  after  blood, 
worshippers  of  wooden  gods,  prayers  to  stocks 
and  stones,  idolators,  antichrists,  the  beast  in 
the  Revelations,  and  what  not,  that  may  render 
them  more  odious  than  hell,  and  more  frightful 
than  the  devil  himself,  and  that  from  the  mouths 
and  pens  of  their  teachers,  and  ministerial 
guides  ?  Is  it  then  to  be  wondered  at,  that 
these  so  grossly  deceived  people  should  enter- 
tain a  strange  prejudice  against  religion,  and  a 
detestation  of  Catholics  ? 

Whereas,  if  these  blindfolded  people  were 
once  undeceived,  and  brought  to  understand, 
that  all  these  monstrous  scandals  are  falsely 
charged  upon  Catholics ;  that  the  Catholic 
doctrine  is  so  far  from  idolatry,  that  it  teaches 
quite  the  contrary,  viz.,  That  whosoever  gives 
God's  honour  to  stocks  and  stones,  as  Protes- 
tants phrase  it,  to  images,  to  saints,  to  angels, 
or  to  any  creature  ;  yea,  to  any  thing  but  to 
God  himself,  is  an  idolater,  and  will  be  damned 
for  the  same ;  that  Catholics  are  so  far  from 
thirsting  after  the  blood  of  others,  that  on  the 
contrary,  their  doctrine  teaches  them,  not  only 
to  love  God  above  all,  and  their  neighbour  as 
themselves,  but  even  to  love  their  enemies.  In 
short,  so  far  different  is  the  Roman  Catholic 
religion  from  what  it  is  by  Protestants  repre- 
sented, that  on  the  contrary,  Faith,  Hope,  and 
Charity,  are  the  three  divine  virtues  it  teaches 
us  ;  Prudence,  Justice,  Fortitude,  and  Tem- 
perance, are  the  four  moral  virtues  it  exhorts 
us  to :  which  christian  virtues,  when  it  happens 
that  they  are,  through  human  fraility,  and  the 
temptations  of  our  three  enemies,  the  world,  the 
flesh,  and  the  devil,  either  wounded  or  lost ; 
then  are  we  taught  to  apply  ourselves  to  such 
divine  remedies,  as  our  blessed  Saviour  Christ 
has  left  us  in  his  church,  viz.,  his  holy  sacra- 
ments, by  which  our  spiritual  infirmities  are 
cured  and  repaired.     By  the  sacrament  of  bap- 


THE    AUTHOR  S    PREFACE. 


tism  we  are  taught,  that  original  sin  is  forgiven, 
and  that  the  party  baptized  is  regenerated, 
and  born  anew  unto  the  mystical  body  of  Christ, 
of  which  by  baptism  he  is  made  a  lively  mem- 
ber :  so  likewise  by  the  sacrament  of  penance 
all  our  actural  sins  are  forgiven ;  the  same  holy 
Spirit  of  God  working  in  this  to  the  forgiveness 
of  actual  sin,  that  wrought  before  in  the  sacra- 
ment of  baptism  to  the  forgiveness  of  original 
sin.  We  are  taught  likewise,  that  by  partaking 
of  Christ's  very  body,  and  his  very  blood,  in  the 
blessed  sacrament  of  the  Eucharist,  we  by  a 
perfect  union  dwell  in  him,  and  he  in  us,  and 
that  as  himself  rose  again  for  our  justification, 
so  we,  at  the  day  of  judgement,  shall  in  him 
receive  a  glorious  resurrection,  and  reign  with 
him  for  all  eternity,  as  glorious  members  of  the 
same  body,  whereof  himself  is  the  head.  It 
further  teaches  us,  that  none  but  a  priest,  truly 
consecrated  by  the  holy  sacrament  of  order,  can 
consecrate  and  administer  the  holy  sacraments. 
This  is  our  religion,  this  is  the  centre  it  tends 
to,  and  the  sole  end  it  aims  at ;  which  point, 
we  are  further  taught,  can  never  be  gained  but 
by  a  true  faith,  a  firm  hope,  and  a  perfect 
charity. 

To  conclude :  if,  I  say,  thousands  of  well- 
meaning  Protestants  understood  this,  as  also  that 
Protestancy  itself  is  nothing  else  but  a  mere  im- 
posture begun  in  Germany  and  England,  main- 
tained and  upheld  by  the  wicked  policy  of  self- 
interested  statesmen  ;  and  still  continued  by  mis- 
representing and  ridiculing  the  Catholic  religion, 
by  misinterpreting  the  holy  scriptures  ;  yea,  by 
falsifying,  abusing,  and,  as  will  appear  is  this  fol- 
lowing treatise,  by  most  abominably  corrupting 
the  sacred  word  of  God  :  how  far  would  it  be 
from  them  obstinately  and  pertinaciously  to  ad- 
here to  the  false  and  erroneous  principles,  in 
which  they  have  hitherto  been  educated  ?  How 
willingly  would  they  submit  their  understandings 
to  the  obedience  of  faith  1  How  earnestly  would 
they  embrace  that  rule  of  faith,  which  our 
blessed  Saviour  and  his  Apostles  left  us  for  our 
guide  to  salvation  ?  With  what  diligence  would 
,  they  bend  all  their  studies,  to  learn  the  most 
wholesome  and  saving  doctrine  of  God's  holy 
church  ?  In  fine,  if  once  enlightened  with  a  true 
faith,  and  encouraged  with  a  firm  hope,  what 
zealous  endeavours  would  they  not  use  to  acquire 
such  virtues  and  christian  perfections,  as  might 
inflame  them  with  a  perfect  charity,  which  is  the 
very  ultimate  and  highest  step  to  eternal  felicity  ? 
To  which,  may  God  of  his  infinite  goodness 
and  tender  mere)'-,  through  the  merits  and  bitter 
death  and  passion  of  our  dear  Saviour  Jesus 
Christ,  bring  us  all.     Amen. 


THE    TRUTH 


OF 


PROTESTANT  TRANSLATIONS  OF  THE  BIBLE 

EXAMINED. 


Our  pretended  Reformers,  having  squared  and 
modelled  to  themselves  a  faith  contrary  to  the 
certain  and  direct  rule  of  apostolical  tradition, 
delivered  in  God's  holy  church,  were  forced  to 
have  recourse  to  the  scripture,  as  their  only  rule 
of  faith  ;  according  to  which,  the  Church  of 
England  has,  in  the  sixth  of  her  Thirty-nine 
Articles,  declared,  "  that  the  scripture  compre- 
hended in  the  canonical  books  (i.  e.,  so  many  of 
them  as  she  thinks  lit  to  call  so)  of  the  Old  and 
New  Testament,  is  the  rule  of  faith  so  far,  that, 
whatsoever  is  not  read  therein,  or  cannot  be 
proved  thereby,  is  not  to  be  accepted  as  any 
point  of  faith,  or  needful  to  be  followed."  But 
finding  themselves  still  at  a  loss,  their  new  doc- 
trines being  so  far  from  being  contained  in  the 
holy  scripture,  that  they  were  directly  opposite 
to  it ;  they  were  fain  to  seek  out  to  themselves 
many  other  inventions  ;  amongst  which,  none 
was  more  gen crally  practised  than  the  corrupting 
of  the  holy  scripture,  by  false  and  partial  transla- 
tions ;  by  which  they  endeavoured,  right  or 
wrong,  to  make  those  sacred  volumes  speak  in 
favour  of  their  new-invented  faith  and  doctrine. 

The  corruptions  of  this  nature  in  the  first 
English  Protestant  translations,  were  so  many, 
and  so  notorious,  that  Dr.  Gregory  Martin  com- 
posed a  whole  book  of  them,  in  which  he  dis- 
covers the  fraudulent  shifts  the  translators  were 
fain  to  make  use  of,  in  defence  of  them.  Some- 
times they  recurred  to  the  HebreAV  text. ;  and 
when  that  spoke  against  their  new  doctrine, 
then  to  the  Greek  ;  when  that  favoured  them 
not,  to  some  copy  acknowledged  by  themselves 
to  be  corrupted,  and  of  no  credit ;  and  when  no 
copy  at  all  could  be  found  out  to  cloak  their 
corruptions,  then  must  the  book  or  chapter  of 
scripture  contradicting  them  be  declared  apoc- 
ryphal ;  and  when  that  cannot  be  made  prob- 
able, they  fall  downright  upon  the  prophefs 
and  apostles  who  wrote  them,  saying,  "  that 
they  might  and  did  err,  even  after  the  coming 
of  the  Holy  Ghost."  Thus  Luther,  accused  by 
Zuinglius  for  corrupting  the  word  of  God,  had 


no  way  left  to  defend  his  impiety,  but  by  impu- 
dently preferring  himself,  and  his  own  spirit, 
before  that  of  those  who  wrote  the  holy  scrip- 
tures, saying,  "  Be  it,  that  the  church,  Augus- 
tine, and  other  doctors,  also  Peter  and  Paul, 
yea,  an  angel  from  heaven,  teach  otherwise,  yet 
is  my  doctrine  such  as  sets  forth  God's  glory,  &c. 
Peter,  the  chief  of  the  apostles,  lived  and  taught 
[extra  vcrbum  Dei)  besides  the  word  of  God."(a) 

And  against  St.  James's  mentioning  the  sa- 
crament of  extreme  unction  :  "  But  though," 
says  he,  "  this  were  the  epistle  of  St.  James,  I 
would  answer,  that  it  is  not  lawful  for  an  apostle, 
by  his  authority,  to  institute  a  sacrament ;  this 
appertains  to  Christ  alone. "(b)  As  though  that 
blessed  apostle  would  publish  a  sacrament  with- 
out warrant  from  Christ !  Our  Church  of 
England  divines,  having  unadvisedly  put  St. 
James's  epistle  into  the  canon,  are  forced,  instead 
of  such  an  answer,  to  say,  "  That  the  sacrament 
of  extreme  unction  was  yet  in  the  days  of  Gre- 
gory the  Great,  unformed."  As  though  the 
apostle  St.  James  had  spoken  he  knew  not 
what,  when  he  advised,  that  the  sick  should  be 
by  the  priests  of  the  church,  "  anointed  with  oil 
in  the  name  of  our  Lord. "(c) 

Nor  was  this  Luther's  shift  alone ;  for  all 
Protestants  follow  their  first  pretended  reform- 
er in  this  point,  being  necessitated  so  to  do  for 
the  maintenance  of  their  reformations,  and  trans- 
lations, so  directly  opposite  to  the  known  letter 
of  the  scripture. 

The  Magdeburgians  follow  Luther,  in  accu- 
sing the  apostles  of  error,  particularly  St.  Paul, 
by  the  persuasion  of  James. ((/) 

Brentius  also,  whom  Jewel  terms  a  grave  and 
learned  father,  affirms,  "  that  St.  Peter,  the 
chief  of  the  apostles,  and   also   Barnabas,  after 

(a)  Vid.  Supr.  torn.  5,  Wittemb.,  fol.  290,  and  in  Ep. 
adGalat.,  cap.  i; 

(b)  De  Capt.  Babil.,  cap.  de  Extrem.  Unct.,  torn.  2, 
Wittemb. 

(c)  See  the  Second  Defence  of  the  Exposition  of  the 
Doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England,  &.c. 

(d)  Cent.  1,  1.  ii.,  c.  10,  col.  560. 


26 


PROTESTANT    TRANSLATIONS 


the  Holy  Ghost  was  received,  together  with  the 
church  of  Jerusalem,  erred." 

John  Calvin  affirms,  that  "  Peter  added  to  the 
schism  of  the  church,  to  the  endangering  of 
Christian  liberty,  and  the  overthrow  of  the  grace 
of  Christ."  And  in  page  150,  he  reprehends 
Peter  and  Barnabas,  and  others. (a) 

Zanchius  mentions  some  Caivinists,  in  his 
Epist.  ad  Misc.,  who  said,  "  If  Paul  should 
come  to  Geneva,  and  preach  the  same  hour 
with  Calvin,  they  would  leave  Paul,  and  hear 
Calvin."  And  Lavatherus  affirms,  that  "  some  of 
Luther's  followers,  not  the  meanest  among  their 
doctors,  said,  they  had  rather  doubt  of  St.  Paul's 
doctrine  than  the  doctrine  of  Luther,  or  of  the 
Confession  of  Augsburgh."(6) 

These  desperate  shifts  being  so  necessary  for 
warranting  their  corruptions  of  scripture,  and 
maintaining  the  fallibility  of  the  church  in  suc- 
ceeding ages,  for  the  same  reasons  which  con- 
clude it  infallible  in  the  apostles'  time,  are  ap- 
plicable to  ours,  and  to  every  former  century ; 
otherwise  it  must  be  said,  that  God's  pun  idence 
and  promises  were  limited  to  a  few  years,  and 
Himself  so  partial,  that  he  regards  not  the 
necessities  of  his  church,  nor  the  salvation  of 
any  person  who  lived  after  the  time  of  his  disci- 
ples ;  the  Church  of  England  could  not  reject 
it  without  contradicting  their  brethren  abroad, 
and  their  own  principles  at  home.  Therefore 
Mr.  Jewel,  in  his  defence  of  the  apology  for  the 
Church  of  England,  affirms,  that  St.  Mark 
mistook  Abiathar  for  Abimelech ;  and  St. 
Matthew,.  Hieremias  for  Zacharias.(c)  And  Mr. 
Fulk  against  the  Rhemish  Testament,  in  Galat. 
ii.,  fol.  322,  charges  Peter  with  error  of  igno- 
rance against  the  Gospel. 

Doctor  Goad,  in  his  four  Disputations  with 
Father  Campion,  affirms,  that  "  St.  Peter  erred 
in  faith,  and  that,  after  the  sending  down  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  upon  them."(rf)  And  Whitaker 
says,  "  It  is  evident,  that  even  after  Christ's 
ascension,  and  the  Holy  Ghost's  descending 
upon  the  apostles,  the  whole  church,  not  only 
the  common  sort  of  Christians,  but  also  even 
the  apostles  themselves,  erred  in  the  vocation 
of  the  Gentiles,  &c. ;  yea,  Peter  also  erred.  He 
furthermore  erred  in  manners,  &c.  And  these 
were  great  errors  ;  and  yet  we  see  these  to  have 
been  in  the  apostles,  even  after"  the  Holy  Ghost 
descended  upon  them. "(e) 

Thus,  these  fallible  reformers,  who,  to  coun- 
tenance their  corruptions  of  scripture,  grace 
their  own  errors,  and  authorise  their  church's 
fallibility,  would  make  the  apostles  themselves 
fallible  ;  but  indeed,  they  need  not  have  gone 
this  bold  way  to  work,  for  we  are  satisfied,  and 
can  very  easily  believe  their  church  to  be  falli- 
ble, their  doctrines  erroneous,  and  themselves 
corrupters  of  the  scriptures,  without  being  forced 
to  hold,  that  the  apostles  erred. (f) 

(a)  Calvin  in  Galat.,  c.  ii.,  v.  14,  p.  511. 

(b)  Lavater  in  Histor.  Sacrament,  p.  18. 

(c)  Pago  361. 

(d)  The  second  dav's  conference. 

(e)  Whitaker  de  Eccles.  contr.  Bellar.  Controvers.  2 
q.  4,  pi  223. 

(/)  Proteinics,  to  authorise  their  own  errors  and  fal- 


And  truly,  if,  as  they  say,  the  apostles  were 
not  only  fallible,  but  taught,  errors  in  manners, 
and  matters  of  faith,  after  the  Holy  Ghost's 
descending  upon  them,  their  writings  can  be  no 
infallible  rule,  or,  as  themselves  term  it,  perfect 
rule  of  faith,  to  direct  men  to  salvation  :  which 
conclusion  is  so  immediately  and  clearly  deduced 
from  this  Protestant  doctrine,  that  the  supposal 
and  premises  once  granted,  there  can  be  no 
certainty  in  the  scripture  itself.  And  indeed, 
this  we  see  all  the  pretended  reformers-  aimed 
at,  though  they  durst  not  say  so  much  ;  and 
we  shall  in  this  little  tract  make  it  most  evi- 
dently appear,  from  their  intolerable  abusing 
it,  how  little  esteem  and  what  slight  regard  they 
have  for  the  sacred  scripture  ;  though  they  make 
their  ignorant  flocks  believe,  that,  as  they  have 
translated  it,  and  delivered  it  to  them,  it  is 
the  pure  and  infallible  word  of  God. 

PjEMpE  I  come  to  particular  examples  of  their 
falsifications  and  corruptions,  let  me  advertise 
the  reader,  that  my  intention  is  to  make  use 
only  of  such  English  translations  as  are  common, 
and  well  known  in  England  even  to  this  day, 
as  being  yet  in  many  men's  hands  :  to  wit, 
those  Bibles  printed  in  the  years  1562,  1577, 
and  1579,  in  the  beginning  of  Queen  Elizabeth's 
reign  ;  which  I  will  confront  with  their  last 
translation  made  in  King  James  the  First's 
reign,  from  the  impression  printed  in  London, 
in  the  year  1683. 

In  all  which  said  Bibles,  (g)  I  shall  take 
notice  sometimes  of  one  translation,  sometimes 
of  another,  as  every  one's  falsehood  shall  give 
occasion  :  neither  is  it  a  good  defence  for  the 
falsehood  of  one,  that  it  is  truly  translated  in 
another,  the  reader  being  deceived  by  any  one, 
because  commonly  he  reads  but  one ;  yea,  one 
of  them  is  a  condemnation  of  the  other.  And 
where  the  English  corruptions,  here  noted,  are 
not  to  be  found  in  one  of  the  first  three  Bibles, 
let.  the  reader  look  in  another  of  them  ;  for  if 
he  find  not  the  falsification  in  all,  he  will  cer- 
tainly find  it  in  two,  or  at  least  in  one  of  them  : 
and  in  this  case,  I  advertise  the  reader  to  be 
very  circumspect,  that  he  think  not,  by  and  by, 
these  are  falsely  charged,  because  there  maybe 
found,  perhaps,  some  later  edition,  wherein  the 
same  error  we  noted,  may  be  corrected  ;  for  it 
is  their  common  and  known  fashion,  not  only  in 
their  translations  of  the  Bible,  but  in  their  other 
books  and  writings,  to  alter  and  change,  add  and 
put  out,  in  their  later  editions,  according  as  either 
themselves  are  ashamed  of  the  former,  or  their 
scholars  who  print  them  again,  dissent  or  disa- 
gree from  their  masters. 

Note  also,  that  though  I  do  not  so  much 
charge  them  with  falsifying  the  Vulgate  Latin 
Bible,  which  has  always  been  of  so  great  autho- 
rity in  the  church  of  God,  and  with  all  the  (h) 
ancient  Fathers,  as  I  do  the  Greek,  which  they 
pretend   to  translate  :   I    cannot,  however,   but 

libility,  would  make  the  apostles  themselves  erroneous 
and  fallible. 

Or)  Bib.  15G2,77,or79. 

(h)  See  the  Preface  to  the  Rheims  New  Testament 


OF    THE    SCRIPTURE. 


27 


observe,  that  as  Luther  wilfully  forsook  the 
Latin  text  in  favour  of  his  heresies  and  erro- 
neous doctrines  ;  so  the  rest  follow  his  example 
even  to  this  day,  for  no  other  cause  in  the  world 
but  that  it  makes  against  their  errors. 

For  testimony  of  which,  what  greater  argu- 
ment can  there  be  than  this,  that  Luther,  who 
before  had  always  read  with  the  Catholic 
Church,  and  with  all  antiquity,  these  words  of 
St.  Paul,  "  Have  not  we  power  to  lead  about  a 
woman,  a  sister,  as  also  the  rest  of  the  apos- 
tles ?"  (a)  And  in  St.  Peter,  these  words, 
"  Labour,  that  by  good  works  you  may  make 
sure  your  vocation  and  election."  Suddenly 
.after  he  had,  contrary  to  his  profession,  taken 
a  wife,  as  he  called  her,  and  preached,  that  all 
votaries  might  do  the  same  :  that  "  faith  alone 
justified,  and  that  good  works  were  not  neces- 
sary to  salvation."  Immediately,  I  say,  after 
he  fell  into  these  heresies,  he  began  to  read  and 
translate  the  former  texts  of  scripture  accord- 
ingly, in  this  manner  :  "  Have  not  we  power  to 
lead  about  a  sister,  a  wife,  as  the  rest  of  the 
apostles  ?"  and,  "  Labour  that  you  may  make 
sure  your  vocation  and  election,"  leaving  out 
the  other  words  "  by  good  works."  And  so  do 
both  the  Calvinists  abroad,  and  our  English 
Protestants  at  home,  read  and  translate  even 
to  this  day,  because  they  hold  the  self-same  er- 
rors. 

I  would  gladly  know  of  our  English  Protes- 
tant translators,  whether  they  reject  the  Vulgate 
Latin  text,  so  generally  liked  and  approved 
by  all  the  primitive  Fathers,  purely  out  of  de- 
sign to  furnish  us  with  a  more  sincere  and 
simple  version  into  English  from  the  Greek, 
than  they  thought  they  could  do  from  the  Vul- 
gate Latin  ?  If  so,  why  not  stick  close  to  the 
Greek  copy,  which  they  pretend  to  translate  ? 
but,  besides  their  corrupting  of  it,  fly  from  it, 
and  have  recourse  again  to  the  Vulgate  Latin, 
whenever  it  may  seem  to  make  more  for  their 
purpose.  Whence  maybe  easily  gathered,  that 
their  pretending  to  translate  the  Greek  copy 
was  not  with  any  good  and  candid  design,  but 
rather,  because  they  knew  it  was  not  so  easv  a 
matter  for  the  ignorant  to  discover  their  false 
dealings  from  it  as  from  the  Latin  ;  and  also, 
because  they  might  have  the  fairer  pretence  for 
their  turning  and  winding  to  and  fro  from  the 
Greek  tothe  Latin,  and  then  again  to  the  Greek, 
according  as  they  should  judge  most  advan- 
tageous to  themselves.  It  was  also  no  little 
part  of  their  design,  "  to  lessen  the  credit  and 
authority  of  the  Vulgate  Latin  translation," 
which  had  so  long,  and  with  so  general  a 
consent,  been  received  and  approved  in  the 
church  of  God,  and  authorized  by  the  general 
Council  of  Trent,  for  the  only,  best,  and  most 
authentic  text. 

Because,  therefore,  I  find  they  will  scarcely 
be  able  to  justify  their  rejecting  the  Latin 
translation,  unless  they  had  dealt  more  sin- 
cerely with  the  Greek  ;  I  have,  in  this  following 

(a)  1  Cor.  \x.  5,  Mulierem  sororem.  2  Pet.  i.  10,  Ut 
per  bona  opera  certani  vestram  vocationeui  et  electio- 
nem  faciatis. 


work,  set  down  the  Latin  text,  as  well  as  the 
Greek  word  whereon  their  corruption  depends  ; 
yet,  where  they  truly  keep  to  the  Greek  and  He- 
brew, which  they  profess  to  follow,  and  which 
they  will  have  to  be  the  most  authentic  text,  I 
do  not  charge  them  with  heretical  corruptions. 

The  left-hand  page  I  have  divided  into  four 
columns,  besides  the  margin,  in  which  I  have 
noted  the  book,  chapter,  and  verse.  In  the 
first  I  have  set  down  the  text  of  scripture  from 
the  Vulgate  Latin  edition,  putting  the  word  that 
their  English  Bibles  have  corrupted  in  a  dif- 
ferent character  ;  to  which  I  have  also  added 
the  Greek  and  Hebrew  words,  so  often  as  they 
are,  or  may  be  necessary,  for  the  better  under- 
standing of  the  word  on  which  the  stress  lies  in 
the  corrupt  translation. 

In  the  second  column,  I  have  given  you  the 
true  English  text  from  the  Roman  Catholic 
translation,  made  by  the  divines  of  Rheims 
and  Doway  ;  which  is  done  so  faithfully  and 
candidly  from  the  authentic  Vulgate  Latin  copy, 
that  the  most  carping  and  critical  adversary  in 
the  world  cannot  accuse  it  of  partiality  or 
design,  contrary  to  the  true  meaning  and  in- 
terpretation thereof.  As  for  the  English  of 
the  said  Rhemish  translation,  which  is  old,  and 
therefore  must  needs  differ  much  from  the  more 
refined  English  spoken  at  this  day,  the  reader 
ought  to  consider,  not  only  the  place  where  it 
was  written,  but  also  the  time  since  which  the 
translation  was  made,  and  then  he  will  find  the 
less  fault  with  it.  For  my  part,  because.  I  have 
referred  my  reader  to  the  said  translation  made 
at  Rheims,  I  have  not  altered  one  syllable  of  the 
English,  though  indeed  I  might  in  some  places 
have  made  the  word  more  agreeable  to  the  lan- 
guage of  our  times. 

In  the  third  column  you  have  the  corruption, 
and  false  translation,  from  those  Bibles  that 
were  set  forth  in  English  at  the  beginning  of 
that  most  miserable  revolt  and  apostacy  from 
the  Catholic  church,  viz.,  from  that  Bible  which 
was  translated  in  King  Edward  the  Sixth's  time, 
and  reprinted  in  the  year  1562,  and  from  the  two 
next  impressions,  made  Anno  1577,  and  1579. 
All  which  were  authorised  in  the  beginning  of 
Queen  Elizabeth's  reign,  when  the  Church  of 
England  began  to  get  footing,  and  to  exercise 
dominion  over  her  fellow  sectaries,  as  well  as 
to  tyrannize  over  Catholics  ;  whence  it  cannot 
be  denied,  but  those  Bibles  were  wholly  agree- 
able to  the  principles  and  doctrines  of  the  said 
Church  of  England  in  those  days,  however  they 
pretend  at  this  day  to  correct  or  alter  them. 

In  the  fourth  column,  you  find  one  of  the  last 
impressions  of  their  Protestant  Bible,  viz., 
that  printed  in  London  by  the  assigns  of  John 
Bill,  deceased,  and  by  Henry  Hills  and  Thomas 
Newcomb,  printers  to  the  King's  most  excel- 
lent Majesty,  Anno  Dom.  1683.  In  which 
Bible,  wherever  I  find  them  to  have  corrected 
and  amended  the  place  corrupted  in  their  former 
translations,  1  have  put  down  the  word  "  cor- 
rected ;"  but  where  the  falsification  is  not  yet 
rectified,  I  have  set  down  likewise  the  corrup- 
tion :  and  that  indeed  is  in  most  places,  yea,  and 


28 


PROTESTANT    TRANSLATIONS 


in  some  two  or  three  places,  they  have  made  it 
rather  worse  than  better  :  and  this  indeed  gives 
me  great  reason  to  suspect,  that  in  those  few 
places,  where  the  errors  of  the  former  false 
translations  have  been  corrected  in  the  latter, 
it  has  not  always  been  the  effect  of  plain  dealing 
and  sincerity  ;  for  if  such  candid  intention  of 
amending  former  faults  had  every  where  pre- 
vailed with  them,  they  would  not  in  any  place 
have  made  it  worse,  but  would  also  have  cor- 
rected all  the  rest,  as  well  as  one  or  two,  that  are 
not  now  so  much  to  their  purpose,  as  they  were 
at  their  first  rising. 

In  the  right-hand  page  of  this  treatise,  I  have 
set  down  the  motives  and  inducements,  that,  as 
we  may  reasonably  presume,  prompted  them  to 
corrupt  and  falsify  the  sacred  text,  with  some 
short  arguments  here  and  there  against  their  un- 
warrantable proceedings. 

All  which  I  have  contrived,  "fn  as  short  and 
compendious  a  method  as  I  possibly  could, 
knowing  that  there  are  many,  who  are  either 
not  able,  or  at  least  not  willing  to  go  to  the 
price  of  a  great  volume.  And  because  my  de- 
sire is  to  be  beneficial  to  all,  I  have  accommo- 
dated it  not  only  to  the  purse  of  the  poorest, 
but  also,  as  near  as  possible,  to  the  capacity  of 
the  most  ignorant ;  for  which  reasons  also,  I  have 
passed  by  a  great  many  learned  arguments 
brought  by  my  author,  Dr.  Martin,  from  the 
significations,  etymologies,  derivations,  uses, 
&c.  of  the  Greek  and  Hebrew  words,  as  also 
from  the  comparing  of  places  corrupted,  with 
other  places  rightly  translated  from  the  same 
word,  in  the  same  translation  ;  with  several 
other  things,  whereby  he  largely  confutes  their 
insincere  and  disingenuous  proceedings  :  these 
I  say,  I  have  omitted,  not  only  for  brevity  sake, 
but  also  as  things  that  could  not  be  of  any  great 
benefit  to  the  simple  and  unlearned  reader. 

As  for  others  more  learned,  I  will  refer  them 
to  the  work  itself,  that  I  have  made  use  of 
through  this  whole  treatise,  viz.,  to  that  most 
elaborate  and  learned  work  of  Dr.  Gregory 
Martin,  entitled,  a  "  Discovery  of  the  manifold 
Corruptions  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,"  &c, 
printed  atRheims,  Anno  1582,  which  is  not  hard 
to  be  found. 

Have  we  not  great  cause  to  believe,  that  our 
Protestant  divines  do  obstinately  teach  contrary 
to  their  own  consciences  ?  For,  besides  their 
having  been  reproved,  without  amendment,  for 
their  impious  handling  the  holy  scriptures,  if 
their  learning  be  so  profound  and  bottomless,  as 
themselves  proudly  boast  in  all  their  works,  we 
cannot  but  conclude,  that  they  must  needs  both 
see  their  errors,  and  know  the  truth.  And 
therefore,  though  we  cannot  always  cry  out  to 
them,  and  their  followers,  "  the  blind  lead  the 
blind,"  yet,  which  is,  alas !  a  thousand  times 
more  miserable,  we  may  justly  exclaim,  "  those 
who  see,  lead  the  blind,  till  with  themselves,  they 
fall  into  the  ditch." 

As  nothing  has  ever  been  worse  resented  by 
such  as  forsake  God's  holy  church,  than  to  hear 
themselves  branded  with  the  general  title  of 
heretics  ;  so  nothing  has   been  ever  more  com- 


mon among  Catholics,  than  justly  to  stigmatize 
such  with  the  same  infamous  character.  I  ara 
not  ignorant  how  ill  the  Protestants  of  our  days 
resent  this  term,  and  therefore  do  avoid,  as  much 
as  the  nature  of  this  work  will  permit,  giving 
them  the  least  disgust  by  this  horrid  appellation  : 
nevertheless,  I  must  needs  give  them  to  under- 
stand, that  the  nature  of  the  hoty  scripture  is 
such,  that  whosoever  do  voluntarily  corrupt  and 
pervert  it,  to  maintain  their  own  erroneous  doc- 
trines, cannot  lightly  be  characterized  by  a  less 
infamous  title,  than  that  of  heretics  ;  and  their 
false  versions,  by  the  title  of  heretical  transla- 
tions, under  which  denomination  I  have  placed 
these  following  corruptions. 

Notwithstanding,  I  would  have  the  Protestant 
reader  to  take  notice,  that  I  neither  name  nor 
judge  all  to  be  heretics,  as  is  hinted  in  my  preface, 
who  hold  errors  contradictory  to  God's  church, 
but  such  as  pertinaciously  persist  in  their  errors. 
So  proper  and  essential  is  pertinacity  to 
the  nature  of  heresy,  that  if  a  man  should  hold 
or  believe  ever  so  many  false  opinions  against 
the  truth  of  Christian  faith,  but  yet  not  with 
obstinacy  and  pertinacity,  he  should  err,  but 
not  be  an  heretic.  Saint  Augustine  asserting, 
that  "if  any  do  defend  their  opinions,  though 
false  and  perverse,  with  no  obstinate  animosity, 
but  rather  with  all  solicitude  seek  the  truth, 
and  are  ready  to  be  corrected  when  they  find 
the  same,  these  men  are  not  "to  be  accounted 
heretics,  because  they  have  not  any  election  of 
their  own  that  contradicts  the  doctrine  of  the 
church."  (a)  And  in  another  place,  against  the 
Donatists,  "  Let  us,"  says  he,  "  suppose  some 
man  to  hold  that  of  Christ  at  this  day,  which  the 
heretic  Photinus  did,  to  wit,  that  Christ  was 
only  man,  and  not  God,  and  that  he  should  think 
this  to  be  the  Catholic  faith  ;  I  will  not  say  that 
he  is  an  heretic,  unless  when  the  doctrine  of  the 
church  is  made  manifest  unto  him, he  will  rather 
choose  to  hold  that  which  he  held  before,  than 
yield  thereunto. "(5) 

Again,  "  Those,"  says  he,  "  who  in  the  church 
of  Christ  hold  infectious  and  perverse  doctrine, 
if  when  they  are  corrected  for  it,  they  resist 
stubbornly,  and  will  not  amend  their  pestilent 
and  deadly  persuasions,  but  persist  to  defend 
the  same,  these  men  are  made  heretics  :"(c)  by 
all  which  places  of  St.  Augustine,  we  see,  that 
error  without  pertinacity,  and  obstinacy  against 
God's  church  is  no  heresy.  It  would  be  well, 
therefore,  if  Protestants,  in  reading  Catholic 
books,  would  endeavour  rather  to  inform  them- 
selves of  the  truth  of  Catholic  doctrine,  and 
humbly  embrace  the  same,  than  to  suffer  that 
prejudice  against  religion,  in  which  they  have 
unhappily  been  educated,  so  strongly  to  bias 
them,  as  to  turn  them  from  men  barely  educated 
in  error,  to  obstinate  heretics  ;  such  as  the  more 
to  harden  their  own  hearts,  by  how  much  the 
more  clearly  the  doctrine  of  God's  holy  church 
is  demonstrated  to  them.  When  the  true  faith 
is  once  made  known  to  men,  ignorance  can   no 

(a)  S.  Aug.  Ep.  162. 

(b)  Lib-  4,  contr.  Donat.,  c.  vi. 

(c)  De  Civit.  Dei,  lib.  xviii.,  c.  51. 


OF    THE    SCRIPTURE. 


29 


longer  secure  them  from  that  eternal  punishment 
to  which  heresy  undoubtedly  hurries  them  :  St. 
Paul,  in  his  Epistle  to  Titus,  affirming,  that  "  a 
man  that  is  an  heretic,  after  the  first  and  second 
admonition,  is  subverted,  and  sinneth,  being 
condemned  b)r  his  own  judgment."  (a) 

Whatever  may  be  said,  therefore,  to  excuse 
the  ignorant,  and  such  as  are  not  obstinate,  from 
that  ignominious  character  :  yet,  as  for  others, 
especially  the  leaders  of  these  misguided  people, 
they  will  scarcely  be  able  to  free  themselves 
either  from  it,  or  escape  the  punishment  due  to 
such,  so  long  as  they  thus  wilfully  demonstrate 
their  pertinacity,  not  only  in  their  obstinately 
defending  their  erroneous  doctrines  in  their 
disputes,  sermons,  and  writings  ;  but  even  in 
corrupting  the  word  of  God,  to  force  that  sacred 
book  to  defend  the  same,  and  compel  that  divine 
volume  to  speak  against  such  points  of  Catholic 
doctrine  as  themselves  are  pleased  to  deny. 

In  what  can  an  heretical  intention  more  evi- 
dently appear,  than  in  falsely  translating  and 
corrupting  the  holy  Bible,  against  the  Catholic 
church,  and  such  doctrines  as  it  has  by  an  unin- 
terrupted tradition,  brought  down  to  us  from  the 
apostles  1     As  for  example  : 

1 .  Against  the  Holy  Sacrifice  of  the  Altar. 

2.  Against  the   Real    Presence   of  Christ's 
Body  and  Blood  in  the  Eucharist. 

3.  Against  Priests,  and  the  Power  of  Priest- 
hood. 

4.  Against  the  *\uthority  of  Bishops. 

5.  Against  the  sacred  Altar  on  which  Christ's 
Body  and  Blood  is  offered. 

6.  Against  the  Sacrament  of  Baptism. 

7.  Against  the  Sacrament  of  Penance,  and 
Confession  of  Sins. 

8.  Against  the  Sacrament  of  Marriage. 

9.  Against  Intercession  of  Saints. 

10.  Against  sacred  Images. 

11.  Against  Purgatory,  Limbus  Patrum,  and 
Christ's  Descent  into  Hell. 

12.  Against  Justification,  and  the  possibility 
of  keeping  God's  Commandments. 

13.  Against  meritorious  Works,  and  the  Re- 
ward due  to  the  same. 

14.  Against  Free  Will. 

15.  Against  true  inherent  Justice,  and  in  de- 
fence of  their  own  Doctrine,  that  Faith  alone  is 
sufficient  for  Salvation. 

16.  Against  Apostolical  Traditions. 

Yea,  against  several  other  doctrines  of  God's 
holy  Church,  and  in  defence  of  divers  strange 
opinions  of  their  own,  which  the  reader  will  find 
taken  notice  of  in  this  treatise  :  all  which,  when 
the  unprejudiced  and  well-meaning  Protestant 
reader  has  considered,  I  am  confident  he  will  be 
struck  with  amazement,  and  even  terrified  to 
look  upon  such  abominable  corruptions  ! 

Doubtless,  the  generality  of  Protestants  have 
hitherto  been  ignorant,  and  more  is  the  pity,  of 
this  ilihandling  of  the  Bible  by  their  translators  : 
nor  have,  I  am  confident,  their  ministerial  guides 
ever  yet  dealt  so  ingenuously  by  them,  as  to  tell 
them  that  such  and  such  a  text   of  scripture  is 

(a)  Titus  iii.  10. 


translated  thus  and  thus,  contrary  to  the  true 
Greek,  Hebrew,  or  ancient  Latin  copies  on 
purpose,  and  to  the  only  intent,  to  make  it  speak 
against  such  and  such  points  of  Catholic  doctrine, 
and  in  favour  of  this  or  that  new  opinion  of  their 
own. 

Does  it  appear  to  be  done  by  negligence,  ig- 
norance, or  mistake,  as  perhaps  they  would  be 
willing  to  have  the  reader  believe,  or  rather 
designedly  and  wilfully,  when  what  they  in  some 
places  translate  truly,  in  places  of  controversy, 
between  them  and  us,  they  grossly  falsify,  in 
favour  of  their  errors  ? 

Is  it  not  a  certain  argument  of  a  wilful  cor- 
ruption, where  they  deviate  from  that  text,  and 
ancient  reading,  which  has  been  used  by  all 
the  fathers  ;  and  instead  thereof,  to  make  the 
exposition  or  commentary  of  some  one  doctor, 
the  very  text  of  scripture  itself? 

So  also  when  in  their  translations  they  fly 
from  the  Hebrew  or  Greek  to  the  Vulgate  Latin, 
where  those  originals  make  against  them,  or  not 
so  much  for  their  purpose,  it  is  a  manifest  sign 
of  wilful  partiality:  and  this  they  frequenllv 
do. 

What  is  it  else  but  wilful  partiality,  when  in 
words  of  ambiguous  and  divers  significations, 
they  will  have  it  signify  here  or  there,  as  pleases 
themselves  ?  So  that  in  this  place  it  must  signify 
thus,  in  that  place,  not  thus  ;  as  Bc/.a,  and  one 
of  their  En  ;lish  Bibles,  for  example,  urge  the 
Greek  word  yviidy.it  to  signify  wife,  and  not  to 
signify  wife,  both  against  the  virginity  and 
chastity  of  priests. 

"What  is  it  but  a  voluntary  and  designed  con- 
trivance, when  in  a  case  that  makes  lor  them, 
they  strain  the  very  original  signification  of  the 
word  ;  and  in  the  contrary  case  neglect  it  alto- 
gether ?     Yet  this  they  do. 

That  their  corruptions  are  voluntary  and 
designedly  done,  is  evident  in  such  places  where 
passives  are  turned  into  actives,  and  actives  into 
passives  ;  where  participles  are  made  to  disagree 
in  case  from  their  substantives  ;  where  solojcisms 
are  imagined  when  the  construction  is  most 
agreeable  ;  and  errors  prel  ended  to  creep  out  of 
the  margin  into  the  text :  but  Beza  made  use  of 
all  these,  and  more  such  like  quirks. 

Another  note  of  wilful  corruption  is,  when 
they  do  not  translate  alike  such  words  as  are  of 
like  form  and  force  ;  example  :  if  Ulccrosus  be 
read  full  of  sores,  why  must  not  Gratiosa  be 
translated  full  of  grace  ? 

When  the  words,  images,  shrines,  procession, 
devotions,  excommunications,  &c.  are  used  in 
ill  part,  where  they  are  not  in  the  orginal  text  ; 
and  the  words,  hymns,  grace,  mystery,  sacra- 
ment, church,  altar,  priest,  Catholic,  justifica- 
tion, tradition,  &c.  avoided  and  suppressed, 
where  they  are  in  the  original,  as  if  no  such 
words  were  in  the  text :  is  it  not  an  apparent 
token  of  design,  and  that  it  is  done  purposely 
to  disgrace  or  suppress  the  said  things  and 
speeches  1 

Though  Beza  and  Whitaker  made  it  a  good 
rule  to  translate  according  to  the  usual  signi- 
fication, and  not  the  original  derivation  of 
5 


30 


PROTESTANT    TRANSLATIONS 


words  ;  yet,  contrary  to  this  rule,  they  trans- 
late Idolum,  an  image  ;  Presbyter,  an  elder  ; 
Diaconus,  a  minister  ;  Episcopus,  an  overseer, 
&c.  Who  sees  not  therefore  but  this  is  wilful 
partiality  ? 

If  where  the  Apostle  names  a  Pagan  idol- 
ater, and  a  Christian  idolater,  by  one  and  the 
same  Greek  word,  in  one  and  the  same  meaning  ; 
and  they  translate  the  Pagan  (idolater)  and  the 
Christian  (worshipper  of  images)  by  two  distinct 
words,  and  in  two  divers  meanings,  it  must  needs 
be  wilfully  done. 

Nor  does  it  appear  to  be  less  designedly  done, 
to  translate  one  and  the  same  Greek  word 
nocQadoatg  tradition,  whensoever  it  may  be  taken 
for  evil  traditions  ;  and  never  so,  when  it  spoken 
of  good  and  apostolical  traditions. 

So  likewise,  when  they  foist  into  their  trans- 
lation the  word  tradition,  taken  in  ill  part,  where 
it  is  not  in  the  Greek ;  and  omit  it  where  it  is 
in  the  Greek,  when  taken  in  good  part ;  it  is 
certainly  a  most  wilful  corruption. 

At  their  first  revolt,  when  none  were  noted 
for  schismatics  and  heretics  but  themselves, 
they  translated  division  and  sect,  instead  of 
schism  and  heresy ;  and  for  heretic,  translated 
an  author  of  sects.  This  cannot  be  excused  for 
voluntary  corruption. 

But  why  should  I  multiply  examples,  when  it 
is  evident  from  their  own  confessions  and  ac- 
knowledgments 1  For  instance,  concerning 
(.lETuroelxe,  which  the  Vulgate  Latin  and  Erasmus 
translate  Agite  pcenitentiam,  "  do  penance :" 
"  This  interpretation,"  says  Beza,  "  I  refuse  for 
many  causes  ;  but  for  this  especially,  that  many 
ignorant  persons  have  taken  hereby  an  occasion 
of  the  false  opinions  of  satisfaction,  wherewith 
the  church  is  troubled  at  this  day." 

Many  other  ways  there  are,  to  make  most 
certain  proofs  of  their  wilfulness  ;  as  when  the 
translation  is  framed  according  to  their  false 
and  heretical  commentary  ;  and  when  they  will 
avouch  their  translations  out  of  profane  writers, 
as  Homer,  Plutarch,  Pliny,  Tully,  Virgil,  and 
Terence,  and  reject  the  ecclesiastical  use  of 
words  in  the  scriptures  and  fathers  ;  which  is 
Beza's  usual  custom,  whom  our  English  trans- 
lators follow.  But  to  note  all  their  marks 
were  too  tedious  a  work,  neither  is  it  in  this 
place  necessary  :  these  are  sufficient  to  satisfy 
the  impartial  reader,  that  all  those  corruptions 
and  falsifications  were  not  committed  either 
through  negligence,  ignorance,  over-sight,  or 
mistake,  as  perhaps  they  will  be  glad  to  pretend  ; 
but  designedly,  wilfully,  and  with  a  malicious 
purpose  and  intention,  to  disgrace,  dishonour, 
condemn,  and  suppress  the  church's  catholic 
and  apostolic  doctrines  and  principles  ;  and  to 
favour,  defend,  and  bolster  up  their  own  new- 
devised  errors,  and  monstrous  opinions.  And 
Beza  is  not  far  from  confessing  thus  much,  when 
against  Castalio  he  thus  complains  :  "  The  mat- 
ter," says  he,  "  is  now  come  to  this  point,  that 
the  translators  of  scripture  out  of  the  Greek 
into  Latin,  or  into  any  other  tongue,  think  that 
they  may  lawfully  do  any  thing  in  translating  ; 
whom  if  a  man  reprehend,  he  shall  be  answered 


by  and  by,  that  they  do  the  office  of  a  translator, 
not  who  translates  word  for  word,  but  who 
expresses  the  sense :  so  it  comes  to  pass  that 
whilst  every  man  will  rather  freely  follow  his 
own  judgment,  than  be  a  religious  interpreter 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  he  rather  perverts  many 
things,  than  translates  them."  This  is  spoken 
well  enough,  if  he  had  done  accordingly.  But, 
doing  quite  the  contrary,  is  he  not  a  dissembling 
hypocrite  in  so  saying,  and  a  wilful  heretic  in  so 
doing  1 

Our  quarrel  with  Protestant  translators  is 
not  for  trivial  or  slight  faults,  or  for  such  verbal 
differences,  or  little  escapes  as  may  happen 
through  the  scarcely  unavoidable  mistakes  of 
the  transcribers  or  printers  :  no  !  we  accuse 
them  of  wilfully  corrupting  and  falsifying  the 
sacred  text,  against  points  of  faith  and  mo- 
rals, (a) 

We  deny  not  but  several  immaterial  faults 
and  depravations  may  enter  into  a  translation, 
nor  do  we  pretend  that  the  Vulgate  itself  was 
free  from  such,  before  the  correction  of  Sixtus 
V.  and  Clement  VIII.,  which,  through  the  mis- 
takes of  printers,  and,  before  printing,  of  tran- 
scribers, happened  to  several  copies  :  so  that  a 
great  many  verbal  differences,  and  lesser  faults, 
were,  by  learned  men,  discovered  in  different 
copies  :  not  that  any  material  corruption  in 
points  of  faith  were  found  in  all  copies  ;  for  such 
God  Almighty's  providence,  as  Protestants 
themselves  confess,  would  never  suffer  to  enter  : 
and  indeed  these  lesser  depravations  are  not 
easily  avoided,  especially  after  several  transcrip- 
tions of  copies  and  impressions  from  the  origi- 
nal, as  we  daily  see  in  other  books. 

To  amend  and  rectify  such,  the  church  (as 
you  may  read  in  the  preface  to  the  Sixtine 
edition)  has  used  the  greatest  industry  imagi- 
nable. Pope  Pius  IV.  caused  not  only  the 
original  languages,  but  other  copies  to  be  care- 
fully examined :  Pius  V.  prosecuted  that  la- 
borious work  ;  and  by  Sixtus  V.  it  was  finished, 
who  commanded  it  to  be  put  to  press,  as 
appears  by  his  bull,  which  begins,  "  Eternus 
Me  Calcstivrn.?  &c,  Anno  1585.  Yet,  notwith 
standing  the  bull  prefixed  before  his  Bible,  then 
printed,  the  same  Pope  Sixtus,  as  is  seen  in  the 
preface,  made  Anno  1592,  after  diligent  exami- 
nation, found  that  no  few  faults  slipped  into  his 
impression,  by  the  negligence  of  the  printers  : 
and  therefore,  Censuit  atque  decrevit,  he  both 
judged  and  decreed  to  have  the  whole  work 
examined  and  reprinted  ;  but  that  second  cor- 
rection being  prevented  by  his  death,  was  after 
the  very  short  reign  of  three  other  popes,  un- 
dertaken, and  happily  finished  by  his  successor 
Clement  VIII.,  answerable  to  the  desire  and 
absolute  intention  of  his  predecessor,  Sixtus  : 
whence  it  is  that  the  Vulgate,  now  extant,  is 
called  the  correction  of  Sixtus,  because  this 
vigilant  Pope,  notwithstanding  the  endeavours 
of  his  two  predecessors,   is   said  to  have  begun 

(a)  See  a  book  entitled,  Reason  and  Religion,  cap. 
viii.,  where  the  Sixtine  and  Clementine  Bibles  are  more 
fully  treated  of. 


OF    THE    SCRIPTURE. 


31 


it,  which  was  according  to  his  desire,  recognized 
and  perfected  by  Clement  VIII.,  and  therefore 
is  not  undeservedly  called  also  the  Clementine 
Bible  :  so  that  Pope  Sixtus's  Bible,  after  Cle- 
ment's recognition,  is  now  read  in  the  church, 
as  authentic,  true  scripture,  and  is  the  very  best 
corrected  copy  of  the  Latin  Yulgate. 

And  whereas  Pope  Sixtus's  bull  enjoined 
that  his  Bible  be  read  in  all  churches,  without 
the  least  alteration  ;  yet  this  injunction  supposed 
the  interpreters  and  printers  to  have  done  ex- 
actly their  duty  every  way,  which  was  found 
wanting  upon  a  second  review  of  the  whole  work. 
Such  commands  and  injunctions  therefore, 
.where  new  difficulties  arise,  not  thought  of 
before,  are  not,  like  definitions  of  faith,  unalter- 
able ;  but  may  and  ought  to  be  changed  accord- 
ing to  the  legislator's  prudence.  What  I  say 
here  is  indisputable  ;  for  how  could  Pope 
Sixtus,  after  a  sight  of  such  faults  as  caused 
him  to  intend  another  impression,  enjoin  no 
alteration,  when  he  desired  one,  which  his  suc- 
cessor did  for  him  ?  So  that  if  Pope  Sixtus 
had  lived  longer,  he  would  as  well  have  changed 
the  Breve,  as  amended  his  impression. 

And  whereas  there  were  sundry  different  lec- 
tions of  the  Yulgate  Latin,  before  the  said  cor- 
rection of  Sixtus  and  Clement,  the  worthy  doc- 
tors of  Louvain,  with  an  immense  labour,  placed 
in  the  margin  of  their  Bible  these  different  lec- 
tions of  scripture  ;  not  determining  which  read- 
ing was  best,  or  to  be  preferred  before  others  ; 
as  knowing  well,  that  the  decision  of  such  causes 
belongs  to  the  public  judicature  and  authority 
of  the  church.  Pope  Clement  therefore,  omit- 
ting no  human  diligence,  compared  lection  with 
lection  ;  and  after  maturely  weighing  all,  pre- 
ferred that  which  was  most  agreeable  to  the 
ancient  copies,  a  thing  necessary  to  be  done 
for  procuring  one  uniform  lection  of  scripture 
in  the  church,  approved  of  by  the  see  apostolic. 
And  from  this  arises  that  villanous  calumny 
and  open  slander  of  Doctor  Stillingfleet ;  who 
affirms,  that  "  the  Pope  took  where  he  pleased 
the  marginal  annotations  in  the  Louvain  Bible, 
and  inserted  them  into  the  text  ;"  whereas,  I 
say,  he  took  not  the  annotations  or  commen- 
taries of  the  Louvain  doctors,  but  the  different 
readings  of  scripture  found  in  several  copies. 

Mr.  James  makes  a  great  deal  of  noise  about 
his  impertinent  comparisons  between  these  two 
editions,  and  that  of  Louvain  :  yet  among  all  his 
differences,  he  finds  not  one  contrariety  in  any 
material  point  of  faith  or  morals  :  and  as  for 
other  differences,  such  as  touch  not  faith  and 
religion,  arising  from  the  expressions,  being 
longer  or  shorter,  less  clear  in  the  one,  and 
more  significant  in  the  other  ;  or  happening 
through  the  negligence  of  printers,  they  give 
him  no  manner  of  ground  for'  his  vain  cavils  ; 
especially  seeing,  I  say,  the  Louvain  Bible  gave 
the  different  readings,  without  determining 
which  was  to  be  preferred ;  and  what  faults 
were  shpped  into  the  Sixtine  edition  were  by  him 
observed,  and  a  second  correction  designed  ; 
which  in  the  Clementine  edition  was  perfected, 
and  one  uniform  reading  approved  of. 


Against  Thomas  James's  comparison,  read 
the  learned  James  Grester,  who  sufficiently  dis 
covers  his  untruths,  with  a  "  Mentito  tertio 
Thomas  James  decern  millia  verborum"  &c,  after 
which,  judge  whether  he  hits  every  thing  he 
says  ;  and  whether  the  Yulgate  Latin  is  to  be 
corrected  by  the  Louvain  annotations,  or  these 
by  the  Yulgate,  if  any  thing  were  amiss  in  either  1 
In  fine,  whether,  if  Mr  James's  pretended  dif- 
ferences arise  from  comparing  all  with  the 
Hebrew,  Greek,  and  Chaldee,  must  we  needs 
suppose  him  to  know  the  last  energy  and  force 
of  every  Hebrew,  Greek,  or  Chaldee  word, 
when  there  is  a  controversy,  better  than  the 
authors  of  the  Louvain,  and  correctors  of  the 
Yulgate  Latin,  the  Sixtine- Clementine  edition  ? 
Again,  let  us  demand  of  him,  whether  all  his 
differences  imply  any  material  alteration  in 
faith  or  morals,  or  introduce  any  notable  error, 
contrary  to  God's  revealed  verities  ?  Or  are  they 
not  rather  mere  verbal  differences,  grounded  on 
the  obscure  signification  of  original  words  ?  In 
fine,  if  he  or  any  for  him,  plead  any  material 
alteration,  let  them  name  any  authentic  copy, 
either  original  or  translation  ;  by  the  indispu- 
table integrity  whereof  these  supposed  errors 
may  be  cancelled,  and  God's  pure  revealed 
verities  put  in  their  place.  But  to  do  this,  after 
such  immense  labour  and  diligence  used  in  the 
correction  of  the  Vulgate,  will  prove  a  desperate 
impossibility. (a) 

Indeed,  Mr.  James  might  have  just  cause  to 
exclaim,  if  he  had  found  in  these  Bibles  such 
corruptions  as  the  Protestant  apostle,  Martin 
Luther,  wilfully  makes  in  his  translations  :  as 
when  he  adds  the  word  "  alone"  to  the  text,  to 
maintain  his  heresy  of  "  faith  alone  justifying ;'"(/;) 
and  omits  that  verse,  "  But  if  you  do  not  forgive, 
neither  will  your  Father  which  is  in  heaven  for- 
give your  sins. "(c)  He  also  omits  these  words, 
"  That  you  abstain  from  fornication  :"  (d)  and 
because  the  word  Trinity  sounded  coldly  with 
him,  he  left  out  this  sentence,  which  is  the  only 
text  in  the  Bible  that  can  be  brought  to  prove 
that  great  mystery  :  "  There  are  three  who  bear 
record  in  heaven,  the  Father,  the  Word,  and 
the  Holy  Ghost,  and  these  three  are  ojie."  (e)  Or 
if  Mr.  James  had  found  such  gross  corruptions 
as  that  of  Zuinglius,  when  instead  of  our  blessed 
Saviour's  postive  words,  "  this  is  my  body,"  he 
translates,  "  this  is  a  sign  of  my  body,"  to  avoid 
the  doctrine  of  the  real  presence,  or  such  as  are 
hereafter  discovered  in  Protestant  English 
translations  :  if,  I  say,  he  had  met  with  such 
wilful  and  abominable  corruptions  as  these,  he 
might  have  had  good  cause  of  complaint ;  but 
seeing  the  most  he  can  make  of  all  his  painful 
comparisons  comes  but  to  this,  viz.,  that  he  notes 
such  faults,  as  Sixtus  himself  observed,  after 
the  impression  was  finished,  and  as  Clement 
rectified  ;  I  think  he  might  have  better  employed 

(a)  See  the  Preface  to  Sixtus  V.,  Edit.  Antwerp,  1599  ; 
and  Bib.  Max  ,  Sext.,  19,  20 ;  Serarius,  c.  19. 
(&)  Rom.  iii.  28. 
(c)  Mark  xi.  26. 
Id)  1  Thes.  iv.  3. 
(e)  John  v.  7. 


32 


PROTESTANT    TRANSLATIONS  OF    THE    SCRIPTURE. 


his  time  in  correcting  the  gross  and  most  into- 
lerable corruptions  of  the  Protestant  translation, 
than  to  have  busied  himself  about  so  unnecessary 
a  work  :  but  there  are  a  certain  sort  of  men, 
who  had  rather  employ  themselves  in  discovering 
imaginary  notes  in  their  neighbours'  eyes,  than 
in  clearing  their  own  from  real  beams. 

To  conclude  this  point,  no  man  can  be  cer- 
tainly assured  of  the  true  scripture,  unless  he 
first  come  to  a  certainty  of  a  true  church,  inde- 
pendently of  scripture :  find  out  therefore  the 
true  church,  and  we  know,  by  the  authority  of 
our  undoubted  testimony,  the  true  scripture  ; 
for  the  infallible  testimony  of  the  church  is  ab- 
solutely necessary  for  assuring  us  of  an  authen- 
tic scripture.  And  this  I  cannot  see  how 
Protestants  can  deny,  especially  when  they 
seriously  consider,  that  in  matters  of  religion, 
it  must  needs  be  an  unreasonable  thing  to  endea- 
vour to  oblige  any  man  to  be  tried  by  the  scrip- 
tures of  a  false  religion  ;  for  who  can  in  pru- 
dence require  of  a  Christian  to  stand  in  debates 
of  religion  to  the  decisions  of  the  scripture  of 
the  Turks,  "  the  Alcoran  V  Doubtless,  there- 
fore, when  men  appeal  to  such  scripture  for 
determining  religious  differences,  their  intention 
is  to  appeal  to  such  scriptures,  and  such  alone  ; 
and  to  all  such  as  are  admitted  by  the  true 
church  :  and  how  can  we  know  what  scriptures 
are  admitted  by  the  true  church,  unless  we  know 
which  is  the  true  church  ?'.'  (a) 

So  likewise,  touching  the  exposition  of  scrip- 
ture, without  doubt,  when  Protestants  fly  to 
scriptures  for  their  rule,  whereby  to  square  their 
religion,  and  to  decide  debates  between  them  and 
their  adversaries,  they  appeal  to  scriptures  as 
rightly  understood  :  for  who  would  be  tried  by 
scriptures  understood  in  a  wrong  sense  1  Now 
when  contests  arise  between  them  and  others  of 
different  judgments  concerning  the  right  mean- 
ing of  it ;  certainly  they  will  not  deny,  but  the 
judge  to  decide  this  debate  must  appertain  to  the 
true  religion  ;  for  what  Christian  will  apply  him- 
self to  a  Turk  or  Jew  to  decide  matters  belong- 
ing to  Christianity  ?  or  who  would  go  to  an 
Atheist  to  determine  matters  of  religion  ? 

In  like  manner,  when  they  are  forced  to  have 
recourse  to  the  private  spirit  in  religious  mat- 
ters, doubtless  they  design  not  to  appeal  to  the 
private  spirit  of  an  Atheist,  a  Jew,  or  an  He- 
retic, but  to  the  private  spirit  of  such  as  are  of 
the  true  religion  :  and  is  it  possible  for  them  to 
know  certainly  who  are  members  of  the  true 
church  ?  or  what  appertains  to  the  true  reli- 
gion, unless  they  be  certainly  informed  "  which 
is  the  true  church  ?"  So  that,  I  say,  no  man  can 
be  certainly  assured  which  or  what  books,  or 
how  much  is  true  scripture  ;  or  of  the  right 
sense  and  true  meaning  of  scripture,  unless 
he  first   come  to  a  certainty  of  the  true  church. 

(a)  We  must  of  necessity  know  the  true  church,  be- 
fore we  be  certain  either  which  is  true  scripture,  or  which 
is  the  true  sense  of  scripture  ;  or  by  what  spirit  it  is  to 
beexpounded.  And  whether  that  church  which  has  con- 
tinued visible  in  the  world  from  Christ's  time  till  this 
day,  or  that  which  was  never  known  or  heard  of  in  the 
world  till  1500  years  after  our  Saviour,  is  the  true 
church,  let  the  world  judge. 


And  of  this  opinion  was  the  great  St.  Augus- 
tine, when  he  declared,  that  "  he  would  not  be- 
lieve the  Gospel,  if  it  was  not  that  the  authority 
of  the  Catholic  Church  moved  him  to  it :"  Ego 
vero  Evangelio  non  crederem,  nisi  me  Ecclesicp. 
Catholicce  commoveret  authoritas.  (b) 


OF   THE   CANONICAL   BOOKS   OF 
SCRIPTURE. 

The  Catholic  Church  "  setting  this  always  be- 
fore her  eyes,  that,  errors  being  removed,  the 
very  purity  of  the  Gospel  may  be  preserved  in 
the  church ;  which  being  promised  before  by  the 
prophets,  in  the  holy  scriptures,  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  first  published  with  his 
own  mouth,  and  afterwards  commanded  to  be 
preached,  to  every  creature,  by  the  apostles,  as 
the  fountain  of  all,  the  wholesome  truth,  and  moral 
discipline  contained  in  the  written  books,  and  in 
the  traditions  not  written,  &c,  following  the 
example  of  the  orthodox  fathers,  and  affected 
with  similar  piety  and  reverence  ;  doth  receive 
and  honour  all  the  books  both  of  the  Old  and 
New  Testament,  seeing  one  God  is  the  author 
of  both,"  &c.  (c)  These  are  the  words  of  the 
sacred  Council  of  Trent ;  which  further  or- 
dained, that  the  table,  or  catalogue,  of  the  cano- 
nical books  should  be  joined  to  this  decree,  lest 
doubt  might  arise  to  any,  which  books  they  are 
that  are  received  by  the  council.  They  are 
these  following,  viz. : 

Of  the  Old  Testament. 

Five  books  of  Moses  ;  that  is,  Genesis,  Exo- 
dus, Leviticus,  Numbers,  Deuteronomy. 

Joshua,  Judges,  Ruth. 

Four  of  the  Kings. 

Two  of  Paralipomenon. 

The  first  and  second  of  Esdras,  which  is 
called  Nehemias. 

Tobias,  Judith,  Hester,  Job,  David's  Psalter 
of  150  Psalms,  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  Canti- 
cles, Wisdom,  Ecclcsiasticus,  Isaias,  Hieremias, 
with  Baruch,  Ezechiel,  Daniel. 

Twelve  lesser  prophets  ;  that  is,  Osea, 
Joel,  Amos,  Abdias,  Jonas,  Michaeas,  Na- 
hum,  Abacuc,  Sophonias,  Aggeus,  Zacharias, 
Malachias. 

The  first  and  second  of  the  Machabees. 

Of  the  New  Testament. 

Four  Gospels,  according  to  St.  Matthew,  St. 
Mark,  St.  Luke,  and  St.  John. 

The  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  written  by  St.  Luke 
the  Evangelist. 

Fourteen  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  viz.,  to  the, 
Romans,  two  to  the  Corinthians,  to  the  Gala- 
tians,  to  the  Ephesians,  to  the  Philippians,  to 
the  Colossians,  to  the  Thessalonians,  two  to 
Timothy,  to  Titus,  to  Philemon,  to  the  Hebrews. 

Two  of  St.  Peter  the  Apostle. 

(b)  S.  Aug.,  lib.  contr.  Epist.  Manich.,  cap.  v. 

(c)  Concil.  Trident.,  Sess.  4,  Decret.  de  Canonicis 
Scripturis  ;  Mark  c.  tilt 


OF  BOOKS  REJECTED  BY  PROTESTANTS  FOR  APOCRYPHAL 


33 


Three  of  St.  John  the  Apostle. 

One  of  St.  James  the  Apostle. 

One  of  St.  Jude  the  Apostle. 

And  the  Apocalypse  of  St.  John  the  Apostle. 

To  which  catalogue  of  sacred  books  is  adjoined 
this  decree  : — 

"  But  if  any  man  shall  not  receive  for  sacred 
and  canonical  these  whole  books,  with  all  their 
parts,  as  they  are  accustomed  to  be  read  in  the 
Catholic  Church,  and  as  they  are  in  the  old  Vul- 
gate Latin  edition,  &c,  be  he  anathema.  " 

The  third  Council  of  Carthage,  after  having 
decreed,  that  nothing  should  be  read  in  the 
jchurch  under  the  name  of  divine  scripture,  but 
canonical  scriptures,  says,  "  that  the  canonical 
scriptures  are  Genesis,  Exodus,"  &c. ;  (a)  so 
reckoning  up  all  the  very  same  books,  and  mak- 
ing particularly  the  same  catalogue  of  them, 
with  this  recited  out  of  the  Council  of  Trent.  St. 
Augustine,  who  was  present  at,  and  subscribed 
to,  this  council,  also  numbers  the  same  books  as 
above,  (b) 

Notwithstanding  which,  several  of  the  said 
books  are  by  the  Protestants  rejected  as  Apo- 
cryphal :  their  reasons  are,  because  they  are  not 
in  the  Jewish  canon,  and  were  not  accepted  for 
canonical  in  the  primitive  church  ;  reasons  by 
which  they  might  reject  a  great  many  more,  if 
it  pleased  them  :  but,  indeed,  the  chief  cause  is, 
that  some  things  in  these  books  are  so  mani- 
festly against  their  opinions,  that  they  have  no 
other  answer  but  to  reject  their  authority,  as 
appears  very  plainly  from  those  words  of  Mr. 
Whitaker  :  "  We  pass  not,"  says  he,  "  for  that 
Raphael  mentioned  in  Tobit,  neither  acknow- 
ledge we  these  seven  angels  whereof  he  makes 
mention  ;  all  that  differs  much  from  canonical 
scripture,  which  is  reported  of  that  Raphael, 
and  savours  of,  I  know  not  what,  superstition. 
Neither  will  I  believe  free  will,  although  the 
book  of  Ecclesiasticus  confirms  it  an  hundred 
times."  (c)  This  denying  of  books  to  be  canoni- 
cal, because  the  Jews  received  them  not,  was 
also  an  old  heretical  shift,  noted  and  refuted  by 
St.  Augustine,  touching  the  book  of  Wisdom  ; 
(d)  which  some  in  his  time  refused,  because  it 
refuted  their  errors  :  but  must  it  pass  for  a 
sufficient  reason  amongst  Christians  to  deny 
such  books,  because  they  are  not  in  the  canon 
of  the  Jews  ?  Who  sees  not  that  the  canon  of 
the  Church  of  Christ  is  of  more  authority  with 
all  true  Christians,  than  that  of  the  Jews  ?  For 
a  "  canon  is  an  assured  rule,  and  warrant  of 
direction,  whereby  (says  St.  Augustine,)  the 
infirmity  of  our  defect  in  knowledge  is  guided, 
and  by  which  rule  other  books  are  known  to  be 
God's  word  :"  his  reason  is,  "  because  we  have 
no  other  assurance  than  the  books  of  Moses, 
the  four  Gospels,  and  other  books,  are  the  true 
word  of  God,  but  by  the  canon  of  the  church." 


(a)  3  Concil.  Carthag. ,  Can.  47. 

(b)  Vid.  Doctr.  Christian.,  lib.  2,  c.  viii. 

(c)  Whit,  contr.  Camp.,  p.  17. 

(d)  S.  Aug.,  lib.  de  Praedest.  Sanct,  c.  14. 


(e)  Whereupon  the  same  great  doctor  uttered 
that  famous  saying  :  "  I  would  not  believe  the 
Gospel,  except  the  authority  of  the  Catholic 
Church  moved  me  thereto." 

And,  that  these  books  which  the  Protestants 
reject,  are  by  the  church  numbered  in  the  sacred 
canon,  may  be  seen  above  :  however,  to  speak 
of  them  in  particular,  in  their  order  : 


THE  BOOK  OF  TOBIAS 

Is,  by  St.  Cyprian,  "  de  Oratione  Dominica" 
alleged  as  divine  scripture,  to  prove  that  prayer 
is  good  with  fasting  and  alms.  St.  Ambrose 
calls  this  book  by  the  common  name  of  scripture, 
saying,  "  he  will  briefly  gather  the  virtues  of 
Tobias,  which  the  scripture  in  an  historical 
manner  lays  forth  at  large  ;"(/)  calling  al&o  this 
history  prophetical,  and  Tobias  a  prophet  :  and 
in  another  place,  he  alleges  this  book,  as  he 
does  other  holy  scriptures,  to  provide  that  the 
virtues  of  God's  servants  far  excel  those  of  the 
moral  philosophers.  (»-)  St.  Augustine  made  a 
special  sermon  of  Tobias,  as  he  did  of  Job.  (h) 
St.  Chrysostom  alleges  it  as  scripture,  denounc- 
ing a  curse  against  the  contemners  of  it.  (i) 
St.  Gregory  also  alleges  it  as  holy  scripture,  (k) 
St.  Bede  expounds  this  whole  book  mystically, 
as  he  does  other  holy  scriptures.  St.  Hieroiu 
dated  it  out  of  the  Chaldee  language, 
•'  judging  it  more  meet  to  displease  the  Phari- 
saical Jews,  who  reject  it,  than  not  to  satisfy  the 
will  of  holy  bishops,  urging  to  have  it."  Ep. 
ad  Chromat.  et  Heliodoriun.  To.  3.  In  fine, 
St.  Augustine  tells  us  the  cause  of  its  being 
written,  in  these  words  :  "  The  servant  of  God, 
holy  Tobias,  is  given  lo  us  after  the  law,  for  an 
example,  that  we  might  know  how  to  practise 
the  things  which  we  read.  And  if  temptations 
come  upon  us,  not  to  depart  from  the  fear  of 
God,  nor  expect  help  from  any  other  but  from 
him." 


OF  THE  BOOK  OF  JUDITH. 

This  book  was,  by  Origcn,  Tertullian,  and 
other  fathers,  whom  St.  Hilary  cites,  held  for 
canonical,  before  the  first  general  Council  of 
Nice  ;  yet  St.  Hierom  supposed  it  not  so,  till 
such  time  as  he  found  that  the  said  sacred  coun- 
cil reckoned  it  in  the  number  of  canonical  scrip- 
tures ;  after  which  he  so  esteemed  it,  that  he  not 
only  translated  it  out  of  the  Chaldee  tongue, 
wherein  it  was  first  written,  but  also,  as  occasion 
required,  cited  the  same  as  divine  scripture,  and 


(c)  S.  Aug.,  lib.  11,  c.  5,  contra  Faustum,  ct  lib.  2,c 
32,  contra  Cesconium. 

(/)  S.  Amb.,  lib.  de  Tobia.  c.  i. 

(g)  Lib.  3,  Offic,  c.  14. 

(A)  S.  Aug.,  Scrm.,  22G.  de  Tem. 

(»)  S.  Chrysost,  Horn.  15,  ad  Heb. 

(i)  S.  Greg.,  part.  3,  Pastor,  curu>  admon.  21. 


34 


OF    BOOKS    REJECTED    BY    PROTESTANTS    FOR    APOCRYPHAL. 


sufficient  to  convince  matters  of  faith  in  <§ontro- 
versy,  numbering  it  with  other  scriptures,  where- 
of none  doubts,  saying,  "  Ruth,  Hester,  Judith, 
were  of  so  great  renown,  that  they  gave  names 
to  the  sacred  volumes."  (a)  St.  Ambrose,  St. 
Augustine,  St.  Chrysostom,  and  many  other  holy 
fathers,  account  it  for  canonical  scripture. 


PART  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  HESTER. 

By  the  Council  of  Laodicea  and  Carthage, 
this  book  was  declared  canonical ;  and  by  most 
of  the  ancient  fathers  esteemed  as  divine  scrip- 
ture ;  only  two  or  three,  before  the  said  coun- 
cils, doubted  of  its  authority.  And  though  St. 
Hierom  in  his  time,  found  not  certain  parts 
thereof  in  the  Hebrew,  yet  in  the  Greek  he 
found  all  the  sixteen  chapters  contained  in  ten  : 
and  it  is  not  improbable  that  these  parcels  were 
sometime  in  the  Hebrew,  as  divers  whole  books 
which  are  now  lost.  But  whether  they  ever 
were  so  or  not,  the  church  of  Christ  accounts 
the  whole  book  of  infallible  authority,  reading 
as  well  these  parts,  as  the  rest  in  her  public  of- 
fice, (b) 


OF  THE  BOOKS  OF  WISDOM. 

It  is  granted,  that  several  of  the  ancient 
fathers  would  not  urge  these  books  of  Wisdom, 
and  others,  in  their  writings  against  the  Jews, 
not  that  themselves  doubted  of  their  authority  ; 
but  because  they  knew  that  they  would  be  rejec- 
ted by  the  Jews  as  not  canonical  :  and  so  St. 
Hierom,  with  respect  to  the  Jews,  said  these 
books  were  not  canonical ;  nevertheless,  he  often 
alleged  testimonies  out  of  them,  as  from  other 
divine  scriptures  ;  sometimes  with  this  paren- 
thesis, Si  cui  tamen placet  libnmirecipcre,  in  cap. 
viii.  and  xii.  Zachariae  :  but  in  his  latter  writings 
absolutely  without  any  such  restriction,  as  in 
cap.  i.  and  Ivi.  Isaiae,  and  in  xviii.  Jeremise  ; 
where  he  professes  to  allege  none  but -canoni- 
cal scripture,  (c)  As  for  the  other  ancient 
fathers,  namely,  St.  Irenaeus,  St.  Clement  of 
Alexandria.  Origen,  St.  Athanasius,  St.  Basil, 
St.  Gregory  Nazianzen,  St.  Gregory  Nyssen, 
St.  Epiphanius,  St.  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  St. 
Chrysostom,  St.  Ambrose,  &c,  they  make  no 
doubt  at  all  of  their  being  canonical  scripture, 
as  appears  by  their  express  terms,  "  divine  scrip- 
ture, divine  word,  sacred  letters,  prophetical 
sayings,  the  Holy  Ghost  saith,  and  the  like." 
And  St.  Augustine  affirms,  that,  "  the  sentence  of 
the  books  of  Wisdom  ought  not  to  be  rejected 
by  certain,  inclining  to  Pelagianism,  which  has 


{a)  See  the  Argument  in  the  Book  of  Judith  in  the 
Doway  Bible,  Tom.  1. 

(6)  Vide  Doway  Bible,  Tom.  1. 

(c)  Vide  Doway  Bible,  Tom.  2,  and  Jodoc,  Coce. 
Tom.  1.  Thesau.  6,  Art.  9. 


so  long  been  publicly  read  in  the  church  of 
Christ,  and  received  by  all  Christians,  bishops, 
and  others,  even  to  the  last  of  the  laity,  penitents, 
and  catechumens,  cum  veneratione  Divina  au- 
thoritatis,  with  veneration  of  divine  authority  1 
Which  also  the  excellent  writers,  next  to  the 
apostles'  times,  alleging  for  witness,  nihil  se 
adhibere  nisi  divinum  testimonium  crediderunt, 
thought  they  alleged  nothing  but  divine  testi- 
mony, (d) 


OF  ECCLESIASTICUS. 

What  has  been  said  of  the  foregoing  book, 
may  be  said  also  of  this.  The  holy  fathers  above 
named,  and  several  others,  as  St..  Cyprian,  de 
Opere  et  Eleemosyna,  St.  Gregory  the  Great, 
in  Psal.  1.  It  is  also  reckoned  for  canonical 
by  the  third  Council  of  Carthage,  and  by  St.  Au- 
gustine, in  lib.  c.  8,  Doct.  Christian,  et  lib.  17,  c. 
20,  Civit  Dei. 


Of  BARUCH,  with  the  Epistle  of  JEREMY. 

Many  of  the  ancient  Fathers  supposed  this 
prophecy  to  be  Jeremiah's,  though  none  of  them 
doubted  but  Baruch,  his  scribe,  was  the  writer  of 
it  ;  not  but  that  the  Holy  Ghost  directed  him  in 
it :  and  therefore  by  the  fathers  and  councils 
it  has  ever  been  accepted  as  divine  scripture. 
The  Council  of  Laodicea,  in  the  last  canon,  ex- 
pressly names  Baruch,  Lamentations,  and  Je- 
remiah's Epistle,  (e)  St.  Hierom  testifies,  that 
he  found  it  in  the  Vulgate  Latin  edition,  and  that 
it  contains  many  things  of  Christ,  and  the  latter 
times  ;  though  because  he  found  it  not  in  the 
Hebrew,  nor  in  the  Jewish  canon,  he  urges  it  not 
against  them.  ( f )  It  is  by  the  Councils  of  Flo- 
rence and  Trent  expressly  defined  to  be  canoni- 
cal scripture. 


Of  the  SONG  of  the  THREE  CHILDREN, 
the  IDOL,  BELL,  and  the  DRAGON,  with 
the  STORY  OF  SUSANNAH. 

It  is  no  just  exception  against  these  and  other 
parts  of  holy  scripture  of  the  Old  Testament, 
to  say,  they  are  not  in  the  Hebrew  edition, 
being  otherwise  accepted  for  canonical  by  the 
Catholic  Church  :  and  further,  it  is  very  pro- 
bable, that  these  parcels  were  sometimes  either 
in  the  Hebrew  or  Chaldee  ;  in  which  two  lan- 
guages, part  in  one,  and  part  in  the  other,   the 


(d)  S.  Aug.  in  lib.de  Pradestinat.  Sanct.,  cap.  14.  Et 
lib.  de  Civit.  Dei,  17,  c.  20. 

(c)  See  the  Argument  of  Baruch 's  Prophecy  in  the 
Doway  Bible,  To.  2. 

(/)  St.  Hierom.,  in  Praefat.  Jeremias. 


OF  BOOKS  REJECTED  BY  PROTESTANTS  FOR  APOCRYPHAL. 


35 


rest  of  the  book  of  Daniel  was  written  ;  for 
from  whence  could  the  Septuagint,  Theodotion, 
Symmachus,  and  Aquila  translate  them  ?  in 
whose  editions  St.  Hierom  found  them.  But  if 
it  be  objected,  that  St.  Hierom  calls  them  fables, 
and  so  did  not  account  them  canonical  scripture  ; 
we  answer,  that  he,  reporting  the  Jewish  opinion, 
uses  their  terms,  not  explaining  his  own  judg- 
ment, intending  to  deliver  sincerely  what  he 
found  in  the  Hebrew  ;  yet  would  he  not  omit 
to  insert  the  rest,  advertising  withal,  that  he  had 
it  in  Theodotion's  translation  ;  which  answer  is 
clearly  justified  by  his  own  testimony,  in  these 
words  :  "  Whereas  I  relate,"  says  he,  "  what  the 
Hebrews  say  against  the  Hymn  of  the  Three 
Children  ;  he  that  for  this  reputes  me  a  fool, 
proves  himself  a  sycophant  ;  for  I  did  not  write 
what  myself  judged,  but  what  they  are  accus- 
tomed to  say  against  me."  (a) 

The  Prayer  of  Azarias  is  alleged  as  divine 
scripture,  by  St.  Cyprian,  St.  Ephrem,  St. 
Chrysostom,  St.  Augustine,  St.  Fulgentius,  and 
others,  (b)  The  Hymn  of  the  Three  Children 
is  alleged  for  divine  scripture,  by  divers  holy 
fathers,  as  also  by  St.  Hierom  himself,  in  cap.  iii. 
ad  Galatos  et  Epist.  49,  de  Muliere  Septies  icta  ; 
also  by  St.  Ambrose  and  the  Council  of  Toledo, 
c.  13. 

So  likewise  the  History  of  Susannah  is  cited 
for  holy  scripture,  by  St.  Ignatius,  Tertullian, 
St.  Cyprian,  St.  Chrysostom,  who  in  Horn.  7, 
fine,  has  a  whole  sermon  on  Susannah,  as  upon 
holy  scripture  :  St.  Ambrose  and  St.  Augustine 
cite  the  same  also  as  canonical. 

The  History  of  Bell  and  the  Dragon  is  judged 
to  be  divine  scripture  ;  St.  Cyprian,  St.  Basil, 
and  St.  Athanasius,  in  Synopsi,  briefly  explica- 
ting the  argument  of  the  book  of  Daniel,  make 
express  mention  of  the  Hymn  of  the  Three 
Children,  of  the  History  of  Susannah,  and  of 
Bell  and  the  Dragon. 


OF  THE  TWO  BOOKS  OF 
MACCABEES. 

Ever  since  the  third  Council  of  Carthage, 
these  two  books  of  the  Maccabees  have  been 
held  for  sacred  and  canonical  by  the  Catholic 
Church,  as  is  proved  by  a  council  of  seventy 
bishops,  under  Pope  Gclasius  ;  and  by  the 
sixth  general  council,  in  approving  the  third  of 
Carthage  ;  as  also  by  the  councils  of  Florence 
and  Trent. 

But  because  some  of  the  Church  of  England 
divines  would  seem  to  make  their  people  believe 
that  the  Maccabees  were  not  received  as  cano- 
nical scripture  in  Gregory  the  Great's  time, 
consequently  not  before,  (c)  I  will,  besides  these 
councils,  refer  you  to  the  holy  fathers  who  lived 
before   St.   Gregory's   days,  and    alleged  these 


(a)  S.  Hier.,  lib.  2.  c.  9,  advers.  Ruffin. 

(b)  Vide  Doway  Bible,  Tom.  2. 

(c)  See  the  Second  Vindication  of  the  Exposition  of  the 
Doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England. 


two  books  of  the  Maccabees  as  divine  scripture, 
namely,  St.  Clement  Alexandrinus,  lib.  i. 
Stromat. ;  St.  Cyprian,  lib.  i.,  Epistolarum, 
Ep.  iii.  ad  Cornelium,  lib.  iv.  ;  Ep.  i.  et  de  Ex- 
hort, ad  Martyrium,  c.  xi.  St.  Isidorus,  lib. 
xvi.,  c.  1.  St.  Gregory  Nazianzen  has  also  a 
whole  oration  concerning  the  seven  Maccabees 
martyrs,  and  their  mother.  St.  Ambrose,  lib.  i., 
c.  41,  OJfic.  See  in  St.  Hierom's  Commentaries 
upon  Daniel,  c.  i.,  11  and  12,  in  how  great 
esteem  he  had  these  books,  though,  because  he 
knew  they  were  not  in  the  Jewish  canon,  he 
would  not  urge  them  against  the  Jews.  And 
the  great  doctor  St.  Augustine,  in  lib.  ii.,  c  8, 
de  Doctrina  Christiana,  et  lib.  18,  c.  36,  .de 
Civit.  Dei,  most  clearly  avouches,  that,  "  Not- 
withstanding the  Jews  deny  these  books,  the 
church  holds  them  canonical."  And  whereas 
one  Gaudentius,  an  heretic,  alleged,  for  defence 
of  his  heresy,  the  example  of  Razias,  who  slew 
himself,  2  Mac.  xiv.,  St.  Augustine  denies  not 
the  authority  of  the  book,  but  discusses  the  fact, 
and  admonishes,  that  it  is  not  unprofitably  re- 
ceived by  the  church,  "  if  it  be  read  or  heard 
soberly,"  which  was  a  necessary  admonition  to 
those  Donatists,  who,  not  understanding  the 
holy  scriptures,  depraved  them,  as  St.  Peter 
says  of  like  heretics,  to  their  own  perdition. 
Which  testimonies,  I  think,  may  be  sufficient  to 
satisfy  any  one  who  is  not  pertinacious  and  ob- 
stinate, that  these  two  books  of  the  Maccabees, 
as  well  as  others  in  the  New  Testament,  were 
received,  and  held  for  canonical  scripture,  long 
before  St.  Gregory  the  Great's  time. 

Judge  now,  good  reader,  whether  the  author 
of  the  second  vindication,  &c,  has  not  imposed 
upon  the  world  in  this  point  of  the  books  of  the 
Maccabees.  And  indeed  if  this  were  all  the 
cheat  he  endeavours  to  put  upon  us,  it  were 
well,  but  he  goes  yet  further,  and  names  eleven 
points  of  doctrine  besides  this,  which  he,  with 
his  fellows,  quoted  in  his  margin,  falsely  affirms 
not  to  have  been  taught  in  England  by  St. 
Augustine,  the  Benedictine  monk,  when  he 
converted  our  nation  ;  telling  us,  "  that  the  mys- 
tery of  iniquity,"  as  he  blasphemously  terms  the 
doctrine  of  Christ's  holy  church,  "  was  not 
then  come  to  perfection."  For,  first,  says  he, 
"  the  scripture  was  yet  received  as  a  perfect 
rule  of  faith."  Secondly,  "  the  books  of  the 
Maccabees,  which  you  now  put  in  your  cannon, 
were  rejected  then  as  apocryphal."  Thirdly, 
"  that  good  works  were  not  yet  esteemed  meri- 
torious." Fourthly,  "  nor  auricular  confession 
a  sacrament."  Fifthly,  "  that  solitary  masses 
were  disallowed  by  him."  And  sixthly,  "  tran- 
substantiation  yet  unborn."  Seventhly,  "  that  the 
sacrament  of  the  Eucharist  was  hitherto  admi- 
nistered in  both  kinds."  What  then  ?  so  it  was 
also  in  one  kind.  Eighthly,  "  purgatory  itself 
not  brought  either  to  certainty  or  to  perfection." 
Ninthly,  "  that  by  consequence  masses  for  the 
dead  were  not  intended  to  deliver  souls  from 
these  torments."  Tenthly,  "  nor  images  allowed 
for  any  other  purpose  than  for  ornament  and 
instruction."  Eleventhly,  "that  the  sacrament 
of  extreme  unction  was  yet  unformed."     Then 


36 


OF  BOOKS  REJECTED  BY  PROTESTANTS  FOR  APOCRYPHAL. 


you  must,  with  your  master,  Luther,  count  St. 
James's  Epistle,  an  epistle  of  straw.  Twelfthly, 
"  and  even  the  Pope's  supremacy  was  so  far  from 
being  then  established  as  it  now  is,  that  Pope 
Gregory  thought  it  to  be  the  forerunner  of  an- 
tichrist for  one  bishop  to  set  himself  above  all 
the  rest." 

I  will  only,  in  particular,  take  notice  here  of 
this  last  of  his  false  instances,  because  he  cites 
and  misapplies  the  words  of  St.  Gregory  the 
Great,  to  the  deluding  of  his  reader  :  whereas 
St.  Gregory  did  not  think  it  antichristian  of 
unlawful  for  the  Pope,  whom  (not  himself,  but) 
our  Saviour  Christ  had  set  and  appointed,  in 
thg  person  of  St.  Peter,  above  all  the  rest,  to 
exercise  spiritual  supremacy  and  jurisdiction 
over  all  the  bishops  in  the  Christian  world  :  but 
he  thought  it  antichristian  for  any  bishop  to  set 
up  himself,  as  John,  bishop  of  Constantinople, 
had  done,  by  the  name  or  title  of  universal 
bishop,  so  as  if  he  alone  were  the  sole  bishop, 
and  no  bishop  but  he,  in  the  universe  :  and  in 
this  sense  St.  Gregory  thought  this  name  or 
title  not  only  worthily  forborne  by  his  prede- 
cessors, and  by  himself,  but  terms  it  profane, 
sacrilegious,  and  antichristian  ;  and  in  this  sense 
the  bishops  of  Rome  have  always  utterly  re- 
nounced the  title  of  universal  bishop ;  on  the 
contrary,  terming  themselves  Servi.  Servorum 
Dei.  And  this  is  proved  from  the  words  of 
Andrreus  Friccius,  a  Protestant,  whom  Peter 
Martyr  terms  an  excellent  and  learned  man. 
"  Some  there  are,"  says  he,  "  that  object  to  the 
authority  of  Gregory,  who  says,  that  such  a 
title  pertains  to  the  precursor  of  antichrist ;  but 
the  reason  of  Gregory  is  to  be  known,  and  may 
be  gathered  from  his  words,  which  he  repeats  in 
many  epistles,  that  the  title  of  universal  bishop 
is  contrary  to,  and  doth  gainsay  the  grace 
which  is  commonly  poured  upon  all  bishops  ;  he 
therefore,  who  calls  himself  the  only  bishop, 
takes  the  episcopal  power  from  the  rest :  where- 
fore this  title  he  would  have  rejected,  &c.  But 
it  is  nevertheless  evident  by  other  places,  that 
Gregory  thought  that  the  charge  and  principality 
of  the  whole  church  was  committed  to  Peter, 
&c,  and  yet  for  this  cause  Gregory  thought  not 
that  Peter  was  the  forerunner  of  antichrist." 
(a)  Thus  evidently  and  clearly  this  Protestant 
writer  explains  this  difficulty. 

To  this  may  be  added  the  testimonies  of  other 
Protestants,  who,  from  the  writings  of  St.  Gre- 
gory, clearly  prove  the  bishop  of  Rome  to  have 
had  and  exercised  a  power  and  jurisdiction,  not 
only  over  the  Greek,  but  over  the  universal 
church.  The  Magdeburgian  Ccnturists  show 
us,  that  the  Roman  see  appoints  her  watch  over 
the  whole  world  ;  that  the  apostolic  see  is  head 
">f  all  churches  ;  that  even  Constantinople  is 
ubject  to  the  apostolic  see.  (b)  These  Cen- 
urists  charge  moreover  the  bishop  of  Rome, 
in  the  very  example  and  person  of  Pope  Gre- 
gory, and  by  collection  out  of  his  writings,  by 
them  particularly  alleged,    "  that  he  challenged 

(a)  Andrasus  Friccius.  de  Ecclesia.  1 .  2,  c.  10,  p.  579. 
(i)  Centur.  6,  Col.  425,  420,  427, 428,  429,  438. 


to  himself  power  to  command  all  archbishops, 
to  ordain  and  depose  bishops  at  his  pleasure." 
And, "  that  he  claimed  a  right  to  cite  archbishops 
to  declare  their  cause  before  him,  when  they 
were  accused."  And  also,  "  to  excommunicate 
and  depose  them,  giving  commission  to  their 
neighbour  bishops  to  proceed  against  them." 
That,  "  in  their  provinces  he  placed  his  legates 
to  know  and  end  the  causes  of  such  as  appealed 
to  the  see  of  Rome."  (c)  With  much  more, 
touching  the  exeroise  of  his  supremacy.  To 
which  Doctor  Saunders  adds  yet  more  out 
of  St.  Gregory's  own  works,  and  in  his  own 
words,  as,  "  that  the  see  apostolic,  by  the 
authority  of  God,  is  preferred  before  all 
churches.  That  all  bishops,  if  any  fault  be 
found  in  them,  are  subject  to  the  see  apostolic. 
That  she  is  the  head  of  faith,  and  of  all  the 
faithful  members.  That  the  see  apostolic  is 
the  head  of  all  churches.  That,  the  Roman 
Church,  by  the  words  which  Christ  spake  to 
Peter,  was  made  the  head  of  all  churches. 
That  no  scruple  or  doubt  ought  to  be  made  ot 
the  faith  of  the  see  apostolic.  That  all  those 
things  are  false,  which  are  taught  contrary  to 
the  doctrine  of  the  Roman  Church.  That  to 
return  from  schism  to  the  Catholic  Church,  is  to 
return  to  the  communion  of  the  bishops  of  Rome. 
That  he  who  will  not  have  St.  Peter,  to  whom 
the  keys  of  heaven  were  committed,  to  shut  him 
out  from  the  entrance  of  life,  must  not  in  this 
world  be  separated  from  his  see.  That  they 
are  perverse  men,  who  refuse  to  obey  the  see 
apostolic."  (d) 

Considering  all  these  words  of  Pope  Gregory, 
does  not  this  vindicator  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land's doctrine  show  himself  a  grand  imposter, 
to  offer  to  the  abused  judgment  of  his  unlearned 
readers,  an  objection  so  frivolous  and  misapplied, 
by  the  advantage  only  of  a  naked,  sounding 
resemblance  of  mistaken  words  ?  To  conclude, 
therefore,  in  the  words  of  Doctor  Saunders  : 
"  he  who  reads  all  these  particulars,  and  more 
of  the  same  kind  that  are  to  be  found  in  the 
works  of  St.  Gregory,  and  with  a  brazen  fore- 
head, fears  not  to  interpret  that  which  he  wrote 
against  the  name  of  universal  bishop,  as  if  he 
could  not  abide  that  any  one  bishop  should  have 
the  chief  seat,  and  supreme  government  of  the 
whole  militant  church  ;  that  man,  says  he, 
seems  to  me  either  to  have  cast  off  all  under- 
sianding  and  sense  of  man,  or  else  to  have  put 
on  the  obstinate  perverseness  of  the  devil."  (e) 

It  is  not  my  business  in  this  place,  to  digress 
into  particular  replies  against  his  other  false 
instances  (/)  of  the  difference  between  the  doc- 
trine of  Pope  Gregory  the  Great,  and  that  of 
the  Council  of  Trent :  I  will  therefore,  in  ge- 
neral, oppose  the  words  of  a  Protestant  bishop 
against  this  Protestant  ministerial  guide,  and  so 
submit  them  to  the  consideration  of  the  judicious 
reader. 

(c)  Vid.  precced.  Nota3. 

(d)  Dr.  Saund.  Visit.  Monar.,  lib.  7,  a  N.  433,  541. 
(c)  Dr.  Saunders  supra. 

(/)  You  will  find  some  of  them  hinted  at  in  other 
places  as  occasion  offers. 


OF    BOOKS    REJECTED    BY    PROTESTANTS    FOR    APOCRYPHAL. 


37 


John  Bale,  a  Protestant  bishop,  affirms,  (a) 
that  "  the  religion  preached  by  St.  Augustine  to 
the  Saxons  was,  altars,  vestments^  images, 
chalices,  crosses,  censors,  holy  vessels,  holy 
waters,  the  sprinkling  thereof,  relics,  translation 
of  relics,  dedicating  of  churches  to  the  bones 
and  ashes  of  saints,  consecration  of  altars,  cha- 
lices and  corporals,  consecration  of  the  font  of 
baptism,  chrism  and  oil,  celebration  of  mass, 
the  archiepiscopal  pall  at  solemn  mass  time, 
Romish  mass  books  ;  also  free  will,  merit,  justi- 
fication of  works,  penance,  satisfaction,  purga- 
tory, the  unmarried  life  of  priests,  the  public 
invocation  of  saints  and  their  worship,  the 
worship  of  images."  (b)  In  another  place,  he 
says,  that  "  Pope  Leo  the  first  decreed,  that  men 
should  worship  the  images  of  the  dead,  and  al- 
lowed the  sacrifice  of  the  mass,  exorcism,  par- 
dons, vows,  monachism,  transubstantiation, 
prayer  for  the  dead,  offering  the  healthful  host  of 
Christ's  body  and  blood  for  the  dead,  the  Roman 
bishop's  claim  and  exercise  of  jurisdiction  and 
supremacy  over  all  churches,  reliquum  ponti- 
ficice  super stitionis  chaos,  even  the  whole  chaos 
of  Popish  superstitions."  He  tells  us,  that 
"  Pope  Innocent,  who  lived  long  before  St. 
Gregory's  time,  made  the  anointing  of  the  sick 
to  be  a  sacrament."  (c) 

These  are  Bishop  Bale's  words  ;  which  this 
vindicator  would  do  well  to  reconcile  with  his 
own.  The  like  may  be  found  in  other  Protes- 
tants ;  namely,  in  Doctor  Humphrey,  in  Jesui- 
tismi,  partii.,  the  Centurists,  &c. 

But  now  to  return  to  the  place  where  we  oc- 
casionally entered  into  this  digression  :  you  see 
by  what  authority  and  testimonies  both  of 
councils  and  fathers  we  have  proved  these 
books,  which  Protestants  reject,  to  be  canonical : 
yet,  if  a  thousand  times  more  were  said,  it  would 
be  all  the  same  with  the  perverse  innovators  of 
our  age,  who  are  resolved  to  be  obstinate,  and, 
after  their  bold  and  licentious  manner,  to  receive 
or  reject  what  they  please  ;  still  following  the 
steps  of  their  first  masters,  who  tore  out  of  the 
Bible,  some  one  book,  some  another,  as  they 
found  them  contrary  to  their  erroneous  and  he- 
retical opinions.     For  example  : 

Whereas  Moses  was  the  first  that  ever  wrote 
any  part  of  the  scripture,  and  he  who  wrote  the 
law  of  God,  the  ten  commandments  ;  yet  Luther 
thus  rejects  both  him  and  his  ten  command- 
ments :  (d)  "  We  will  neither  hear  nor  see 
Moses,  for  he  was  given  only  to  the  Jews  ;  nei- 
ther does  he  belong  in  any  thing  to  us."  "  I," 
says  he,  "  will  not  receive  (e)  Moses  with  his 
law  ;  for  he  is  the  enemy  of  Christ."  (/)  "  Mo- 
ses is  the  master  of  all  hangmen."  (g)  "  The  ten 
commandments  belong  not  to  Christians."  "  Let 
he  ten  commandments  be  altogether  rejected, 

(a)  Bale  in  Act.  Rom.  Pontif,.  Edit.  Basil.,  1658,  p. 
44,  45,  46,  47,  et  Cent.  I  ,  Col.  3. 

(b)  Pageant  of  Popes,  fol.  27. 

(c)  Pageant  of  the  Popes,  fol.  66. 

(d)  Tom.  3,  Germ.,  fol. 40,  41,  and  in  Colloq.  Mensal., 
Ger.,  fol.  152,  153. 

(e)  In  Coloc.  Mensal.,  c.  de  Lege  et  Evan. 
(/)  Ibid.,  fol.  118. 

(g)  Serm.  de  Mose. 

6 


and  all  heresy  will  presently  cease  ;  for  the  ten 
commandments  are,  as  it  were,  the  fountain  from 
whence  all  heresies  spring."  (h) 

Islebius,  Luther's  scholar,  taught,  (i)  that 
"the  decalogue  was  not  to  be  taught  in  the 
church:"  and  from  this  came  (k)  the  sect  of 
Antinomians,  who  publicly  taught,  that  "  the 
law  of  God  is  not  worthy  to  be  called  the  word 
of  God:  if  thou  art  an  whore,  if  an  whore- 
monger, if  an  adulterer,  or  otherwise  a  sinner, 
believe,  and  thou  walkest  in  the  way  of  salva- 
tion. When  thou  art  drowned  in  sin  even  to 
the  bottom,  if  thou  believest,  thou  art  in  the 
midst  of  happiness.  All  that  busy  themselves 
about  Moses,  that  is,  the  ten  commandments, 
belong  to  the  devil  ;  to  the  gallows  with 
Moses."  (/) 

Martin  Luther  believes  not  all  things  to  be  so 
done,  as  they  are  related  in  the  book  of  Job  : 
with  him  it  is,  "  as  it  were,  the  argument  of  a 
fable."  (m) 

Castalio  commanded  the  canticles  of  Solomon 
to  be  thrust  out  of  the  canon,  as  an  impure  and 
obscene  song  ;  reviling  with  bitter  reproaches, 
such  ministers,  as  resisted  him  therein,  (n) 

Pomeran,  a  great  evangelist  among  the  Luther- 
ans, writes  thus  touching  St.  James's  Epistle  : 
"  He  concludes  ridiculously,  he  cites  scripture 
against  scripture,  which  thing  the  Holy  Ghost 
cannot  abide  :  wherefore  that  epistle  may  not  be 
numbered  among  other  books,  which  set  forth  the 
justice  of  faith."  (o) 

Vitus  Theodorus,  a  Protestant  preacher,  ot 
Nuremberg,  writes  thus  :  "  The  Epistle  of  James 
and  Apocalypse  of  John,  we  have  of  set  purpose 
left  out,  because  the  Epistle  of  James  is  not  only 
in  certain  places  reprovable,  where  he  too  much 
advances  works  against  faith  ;  but  also  his  doc- 
trine throughout  is  patched  together  with  divers 
pieces,  whereof  no  one  agrees  with  another."(p) 

The  Magdeburgian  Centurists  say,  that  "  the 
Epistle  of  James  much  swerves  from  the  analogy 
of  the  apostolical  doctrine,  whereas  it  ascribes 
justification  not  only  to  faith,  but  to  works,  and 
calls  the  law,  a  law  of  liberty."  (q) 

John  Calvin  doubted  whether  the  apostles' 
creed  was  made  by  the  apostles.  He  argued  St. 
Matthew  of  error.  He  rejected  these  words  : 
"  many  are  called,  but  few  are  chosen."  (r) 

Clemitius,  an  eminent  Protestant,  opposes  the 
evangelists  one  against  another  :  "  Matthew  and 
Mark,"  says  he,  "  deliver  the  contrary  ;  there- 
fore to  Matthew  and  Mark,  being  two  witnesses, 
more  credit  is  to  be  given  than  to  one  Luke," 
&c.  (s) 

(h)  In  Convival.  Colloq.  cited  by  Auri  faber,  cap.  de 
Lege. 

(t)  See  Osiander,  Cent.  16,  p.  311,  312,  320. 

(#)  Sleidan,  Hist,  1,12,  fol.  162. 

(I)  Vid.  Confessio.  Mansfieldensium  Ministrorum 
Tit.  de  Antinomis,  fol.  89,  !)0. 

(m.)  In  Serm.  Convival.  Tit.  de  Patriarch,  et  Prophet, 
et  Tit.  de  libris  Vet  et.  Nov.  Test. 

(n)  Vid.  Beza  in  Vita  Calvini. 

(o)  Pomeran.  ad  Rom  ,  c.  8. 

(p)  In  Annot.  in  Nov.  Test ,  pag.  ult. 

(?)  Cent.  I.,  1,2,  c.  4,  Col.  54. 

(r)  Inst,  1,  2,  c.  16.  In  Matt  27,  Harm,  in  Matt.  20,16. 

(s)  Victoria  Veritalis  et  Rnina  Papattis,  Arg.  5. 


38 


OF  SUCH  BOOKS  AS  PROTESTANTS  CALL  APOCRYPHA. 


Zuinglius  and  other  Protestants  affirm,  that 
"  all  things  in  St.  Paul's  Epistles  are  not  sacred  ; 
and  that  in  sundry  things  he  erred."  (a) 

Mr.  Rogers,  the  great  labourer  to  our  English 
convocation  men,  names  several  of  his  Protestant 
brethren,  who  rejected  for  apocryphal  the  Epis- 
tle of  Paul  to  the  Hebrews,  of  St.  James,  the 
first  and  second  of  John,  of  Jude,  and  the  Apoc- 
alypse." (b) 

Thus,  you  see,  these  pretended  reformers 
have  torn  out,  some  one  piece  or  book  of  sacred 
scripture,  some  another  ;  with  such  a  licentious 
freedom,  rejecting,  deriding,  discarding,  and 
censuring  them,  that  their  impiety  can  never  be 
paralleled  but  by  professed  Atheists.  Yet  all 
these  sacred  books  were,  as  is  said,  received  for 
canonical  in  the  third  Council  of  Carthage,  above 
thirteen  hundred  years  ago. 

But,  with  the  Church  of  England,  it  matters 
not  by  what  authority  books  are  judged  canonical, 
if  the  Holy  Spirit,  in  the  hearts  of  her  children, 
testify  them  to  be  from  God.  They  telling  us, 
by  Mr.  Rogers,  that  they  judge  such  and  such 
books  canonical,  "  not  so  much  because  learned 
and  godly  men  in  the  church  so  have,  and  do 
receive  and  allow  them,  as  for  that  the  Holy 
Spirit  in  our  hearts  doth  testify,  that  they  are 
from  God."  By  instinct  of  which  private  Spirit 
in  their  hearts,  they  decreed  as  many  as  they 
thought  good  for  canonical,  and  rejected  the 
rest  ;  as  you  may  see  in  the  sixth  of  the  Thirty- 
nine  Articles,  (c) 


OF  SUCH  BOOKS  AS  PROTESTANTS 
CALL  APOCRYPHA. 

The  Church  of  England  has  decreed,  (d)  that 
"  such  are  to  be  understood  canonical  books  of 
the  Old  and  New  Testament,  of  whose  authority 
there  was  never  any  doubt  in  the  church  :"  and 
therefore,  by  this  rule  she  rejects  these  for  apoc- 
ryphal, viz., 

Tobit. 

Judith.  ' 

The  rest  of  Esther. 

Wisdom. 

Ecclesiasticus. 

Baruch,  with  the  Epistle  of  Jeremiah. 

The  Song  of  the  Three  Children. 

The  Idol,  Bell,  and  the  Dragon. 

The  Story  of  Susannah. 

Maccabees  I. 

Maccabees  II. 

Manesseth,  Prayer  of. 

Esdras  III. 

Esdras  IV.  (e) 

(a)  Tom.  3,  Elench.,  f.  10.     Magdeburg.  Cent.  1,  1. 
,  c.  10.  Col.  580. 
(6)  Defence  of  the  39  Articles,  Art.  G. 

(c)  The  private  spirit,  not  the  church,  told  those  Pro- 
testants who  made  the  39  Articles,  what  books  of  scrip- 
ture they  were  to  hold  for  canonical. 

(d)  In  the  6th  of  the  39  Articles. 

(e)  The  three  last  are  not  numbered  in  the  canon  of 
the  scripture. 


But  if  none  must  pass  for  canonical,  but  such  as 
were  never  doubted  of  in  the  church,  I  would 
know  why  the  Church  of  England  admits  of 
such  books  of  the  New  Testament  as  have  for- 
merly been  doubted  of?  "  Some  ancient  writers 
doubted  of  the  last  chapter  of  St.  Mark's  Gos- 
pel :  (/ )  others  of  some  part  of  the  22nd  of  St. 
Luke  ;  (g)  some  of  the  beginning  of  the  8th  of 
St.  John ;  (A)  others  of  the  Epistle  to  the  He- 
brews ;  (i)  and  others  of  the  Epistles  of  St. 
James,  Jude,  the  second  of  Peter,  the  second 
and  third  of  John,  and  the  Apocalypse."  (k) 

And  Doctor  Bilson,  a  Protestant,  affirms,  that 
"  the  scriptures  were  not  fully  received  in  all 
places,  no,  not  in  Eusebius's  time."  He  says, 
"  the  Epistles  of  James,  Jude,  the  second  of 
Peter,  the  second  and  third  of  John,  are  contra- 
dicted, as  not  written  by  the  apostles.  The 
epistle  to  the  Hebrews  was  for  a  while  contra- 
dicted," &c.  The  churches  of  Syria  did  not  re- 
ceive the  second  Epistle  of  Peter,  nor  the  second 
and  third  of  John,  nor  the  Epistle  of  Jude,  nor 
the  Apocalypse.  The  like  might  be  said  for  the 
churches  of  Arabia  :  will  you  hence  conclude, 
says  this  doctor,  that  these  parts  of  scripture 
were  not  apostolic,  or  that  we  need  not  receive 
them  now,  because  they  were  formerly  doubted 
of?     Thus  Docter  Bilson.  (I) 

And  Mr.  Rogers  confesses,  that  "  although 
some  of  the  ancient  fathers  and  doctors  accepted 
net  all  the  books  contained  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment for  canonical ;  yet  in  the  end,  they  were 
wholly  taken  and  received  by  the  common  con- 
sent of  the  Church  of  Christ,  in  this  world,  for 
the  very  Word  of  God,"  &c.  (m) 

And,  by  Mr.  Rogers  and  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land's leave,  so  were  also  those  books  which  they 
call  Apocrypha.  For  though  they  were,  as  we 
do  not  deny,  doubted  of  by  some  of  the  ancient 
fathers,  and  not  accepted  for  canonical  :  "  yet 
in  the  end,"  to  use  Mr.  Rogers'  words,  they 
were  wholly  taken  and  received  by  the  common 
consent  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  in  this  world, 
for  the  very  Word  of  God."(n)  Yide  third  Coun- 
cil of  Carthage,  which  decrees,  "  that  nothing 
should  be  read  in  the  church,  under  the  name  of 
divine  scriptures,  besides  canonical  scriptures  :" 
and  defining  which  are  canonical,  reckons  those 
which  the  Church  of  England  rejects  as  apocry- 
phal." To  this  council  St.  Augustine  subscribed, 
who,  (o)  with  St.  Innocent,  (p)  Gelasius,  and 
other  ancient  writers,  number  the  said  books  in 
the  canon  of  the  scripture.  And  Protestants 
themselves  confess,  they  were  received  in  the 
number  of  canonical  scriptures,  (q.) 

(/)  See  St.  Hierom.  epist.  ad  Hed.  q.  3. 

(g)  S.  Hilar.  1  10,  de  Trin.,  et  Hierom,  1.  2,  contr. 
Pelagian. 

(A)  Euseb.  H.,  1.  3,  c.  39. 

({)  Id,  1.  3,  c.  3. 

(k)  Et,  c.  25,  28.  Hierom  Divinis  Illust,  in  P.  Jac. 
Jud.  Pet.  et  Joan.,  et  Ep.  ad  Dardan. 

(I)  Survey  of  Christ.  Suff,  p.  664.  Vid.  1st  and  4th 
day's  Confer,  in  the  Tower,  anno  1581. 

(m)  Def.  of  the  39  Articles,  p.  31,  Art.  6. 

(n)  Third  Council  of  Cartha-e,  Can.  47. 

(o)  De  Doct.  Christian.,  1.  2,  c.8. 

(p)  Epist.  ad  Exuper.,  c.  7. 

(q)  Tom.  1,  Cone.  Decret.  cum  70  Episcop. 


OF  SUCH  BOOKS  AS  PROTESTANTS  CALL  APOCRYPHA. 


39 


Brentius,  a  Protestant,  says,  "  there  are  some 
of  the  ancient  fathers,  who  receive  these  apoc- 
ryphal books  into  the  number  of  canonical 
scriptures ;  and  also  some  councils  command 
them  to  be  acknowledged  as  canonical."(a) 

Doctor  Covel  also  affirms  of  all  these  books, 
that,  "  if  Ruffinus  be  not  deceived,  they  were 
approved  of,  as  parts  of  the  Old  Testament,  by 
the  apostles. "(b) 

So  that  what  Christ's   Church  receives   as 
canonical,  we  are  not  to  doubt  of:  Doctor  Fulk 
avouches,  that  "  the  Church  of  Christ  has  judg- 
es) Brentius  Apol.  Conf.  Wit.  Bucer's  scripts.  Ang., 
p.  713. 
(b)  Covel  cont.  Burg.,  pp.  76,  77,  78. 


ment  to  discern  true  writing  from  counterfeit, 
and  the  Word  of  God  from  the  writings  of  men  ; 
and  this  judgment  she  has  of  the  Holy  Ghost." 
(c)  And  Jewel  says,  "  the  Church  of  God  has 
the  spirit  of  wisdom  to  discern  true  scripture 
from  false. "(d) 

To  conclude,  therefore,  in  the  words  of  the 
Council  of  Trent :  "  If  any  man  shall  not  receive 
for  sacred  and  canonical  these  whole  books,  with 
all  their  parts,  as  they  are  read  in  the  Catholic 
Church,  and  as  they  are  in  the  Vulgate  Latin 
edition,  let  him  be  accursed. "(c) 

re)  Fulk  An.  to  a  Countr.  Cathol.,  p.  5. 

(i)  Jewel  Def.  of  the  Apol.,  p.  201. 

(e)  Concil.  Trid.,  Sess.  4,  Deer,  de  Can.  Scrip 


40 


I.    PROTESTANT    TRANSLATIONS    AGAINST 


The  Book, 

The  true  English  accord- 

Corruptions in  the  Pro- 

The last  Translation  of 

Chapter, 

The  Vulgate  Latin  Text. 

ing  to  the  Rhemish 

testant  Bibles,  printed 

the  Protestant  Bible,  Ed. 

and  Verse. 

Translation. 

A.  D.  1562,  1577.  1579. 

Lon.,  an.  1683. 

St.  Matth. 

Et  ego   dico   tibi, 

And    I     say    to 

Instead  of  church 

It  is  corrected  in 

chap.  xvi. 

quia   tu   es  Petrus, 

thee,  that  thou   art 

they  translate  "  con- 

this last  translation. 

verse  18. 

et  super   hanc  Pet- 

Peter,  and  upon  this 

gregation."      Upon 

ram   adificabo  "  ec- 

Rock   will   I  build 

this  Rock  will  I  build 

clesiam   meam,"    fta 

my  "  church." 

my  "  congregation." 

xty  ixxXtjaiap.  (1) 

(1) 

St.  Matth. 

Quod  si  non  au- 

And    if   he  will 

If  he  will  not  hear 

Corrected. 

chap,  xviii. 

dierit  eos,  die  "  Ec- 

not  hear  them,  tell 

them,  tell  the  "  con- 

verse 17. 

clesiee,"  ixxXrjola-  si 

the  "  church  ;"  and 

gregation  ;"   and    if 

autem    "  ecclesiam," 

if  he  will  not  hear 

he  will  not  hear  the 

txxXqolus,  non  audie- 

the    "  church,"    let 

"congregation,"  &c. 

rit,  sit  tibi  sicut  eth- 

him  be   as  an  hea- 

nicus et  publicanus. 

then,  and  as  a  pub- 
lican. 

Ephesians 

Viri,  diligite  uxores 

Husbands,     love 

Husbands,     love 

Corrected. 

chap.  v. 

vestras,      sicut      et 

your  wives, as  Christ 

your  wives,as  Christ 

verses  23, 

Christies  dilexit "  ec- 

loved the  "  church," 

loved  the  "  congre- 

24, 25,  27, 

clesiam." 

verse  25. 

gation." 

29,  32. 

lit   exhiberet   ipsi 

That    he    might 

That   he    might 

Corrected 

sibi  gloriosam  "  ec- 

present to  himself  a 

present   to   himself 

clesiam." 

glorious   "  church," 
verse  27. 

a  glorious  "  congre- 
gation." 

u  Sacramenlum  " 

For    this     is     a 

For  this  is  a  great 

Corrected 

hoc    est     magnum ; 

great  "  sacrament ;" 

"secret,"  for  I  speak 

ego    autem   dico   in 

but  I  speak  in  Christ, 

in  Christ,  and  in  the 

Christo  et  "ecclesia" 

and  in  the  "church," 

"  congregation." 

ixxXrjalav. 

ver.  32,  &c. 

Hebrews 

Et   ecclesiam  pri- 

And  the  "  church" 

And    the    "  con- 

Corrected. 

chap.  ii. 

mitivorum,  ixxXnala. 

of  the  first-born. 

gregation"    of    the 

verse  23. 

first-born. 

Canticles 

Una  est  columba 

My  dove  is  "  one." 

My  dove  is  "alone." 

My  dove   it  M  but 

chap.  vi. 

mea.     nnx  fi(a.  (2) 

(2) 

one." 

verse  8. 

Ephesians 

Et    ipsum    dedit 

And  hath   made 

And  gave  him  to 

And  gave  him  to 

chap.  i. 

caput  supra  omnem 

him   head  over  all 

be  the  head  over  all 

be   the   head    over 

verses  22, 

"  ecclesiam" qum  est 

the  "church,"  which 

things  to  the  "  con- 

all   things    to    the 

23. 

corpus      ipsius,     et 

is  his  body,  the  ful- 

gregation," which  is 

"  church,"  which  is 

plenitudo   ejus,    qui 

ness  of  him  "  which 

his  body,  the  fulness 

his  body,  the  fulness 

omnia    in     omnibus 

is  filled,"  all  in  all. 

of  him  "thatfilleth" 

of  him  "  that  filleth" 

"  adimpletur, "       to 

all  in  all.  (3) 

all  in  all. 

nXrjPB/jiva.  (3) 

THE    CHURCH. 


41 


The  two  English  Bibles,  (a)  usually  read  in 
the  Protestant  congregations  at  their  first  rising 
up,  left-  out  the  word  Catholic  in  the  title  of 
those  epistles  which  have  been  known  by  the 
name  of  Catholic®  Epistolce,  ever  since  the 
apostles'  time  :  (b)  and  their  latter  translations, 
dealing  somewhat  more  honestly,  have  turned 
the  word  Catholic  into  "  General,"  "  the  General 
Epistle  of  James,  of  Peter,"  &c.  as  if  we  should 
say  in  our  creed, "we  believe  the  general  church." 
So  that  by  this  rule,  when  St.  Augustine  says, 
that  the  manner  was  in  cities,  where  there  was 
liberty  of  religion,  to  ask,  qua  itur  ad  Catholicum  ? 
we  must  translate  it,  which  is  the  way  to  the 
general?  And  when  St.  Hierom  says,  if  we  agree 
in  faith  with  the  bishop  of  Rome,  ergo  Catholici 
sumus ;  we  must  translate,  "  then  we  are  gene- 
rals."    Is  not  this  good  stuff? 


(1)  And  as  they  suppress  the  name  Catholic, 
even  so  did  they,  in  their  first  English  Bible, 
the  name  of  church  itself  :(c)  because  at  their 
first  revolt  and  apostacy  from  that  church, 
which  was  universally  known  to  be  the  only  true 
Catholic  Church,  it  was  a  great  objection 
against  their  schismatical  proceedings,  and 
stuck  so  much  in  the  people's  consciences,  that 
they  left  and  forsook  the  church,  and  the  church 
condemned  them  :  to  obviate  which,  in  the 
English  translation  of  1562,  they  so  totally  sup- 
pressed the  word  church,  that  it  is  not  once  to 
be  found  in  all  that  Bible,  so  long  read  in  their 
congregations  :  because,  knowing  themselves  not 
to  be  the  church,  they  were  resolved  not  to 
leave  God  Almighty  any  church  at  all,  where 
they  could  possibly  root  it  out,  viz.,  in  the  Bible. 
And  it  is  probable,  if  it  had  been  as  easy  for 
them  to  have  eradicated  the  church  from  the 
earth,  as  it  was  to  blot  the  word  out  of  their 
Bible,  they  would  have  prevented  its  "continuing 
to  the  end  of  the  world." 


Another  cause  for  their  suppressing  the  name 
church  was,  "  that  it  should  never  sound  in  the 
common  people's  ears  out  of  the  scriptures,"  and 
that  it  might  seem  to  the  ignorant  a  good  argu- 
ment against  the  authority  of  the  church,  to  say, 
"  we  find  not  this  word  church  in  all  the  Bible  :" 
as  in  other  articles,  where  they  find  not  the 
express  words  in  the  scripture. 


Our  blessed  Saviour  says  :  "  Upon  this  rock  I 
will  build  my  church  ;"  but  they  make  him  say, 
"  Upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my  congregation." 
They  make  the  Apostle  St.  Paul  say  to  Timothy, 
1  Ep.  c.  iii.  "  The  house  of  God,  which  is  the 
congregation,"  not  "  the  church  of  the  living 
God,  the  pillar  and  ground  of  truth."  Thus 
they  thrust  out  God's  glorious,  unspotted,  and 


(a)  Bib.  1562,  1677. 

(b)  Euseb.,  Hist.  Eccles.,  lib.  2,  c.  23,  in  fine. 

(c)  Bible,  printed  anno  1562. 


most  beautiful  spouse,  the  church  ;  and  in  place 
of  it,  intrude  their  own  little,  wrinkled,  and 
spotted  congregation.  So  they  boldly  make  the 
apostle  say :  "  He  hath  made  him  head  of  the  con- 
gregation, which  is  the  body  :"  and  in  another 
place,  "  The  congregation  of  the  first-born  :M 
where  the  apostle  mentions  heavenly  Jerusalem, 
the  city  of  the  living  God,  &c;  so  that  by  this 
translation  there  is  no  longer  any  church  mili- 
tant and  triumphant,  but  only  congregation  ;  in 
which  they  contradict  St.  Augustine,  who 
affirms,  that  "  though  the  Jewish  congregation 
was  sometimes  called  a  church,  yet  the  apostles 
never  called  the  church  a  congregation."  But 
their  last  translation  having  restored  the  word 
church,  I  shall  say  no  more  of  it  in  this  place. 


(2)  Again,  the  true  church  is  known  by  unity, 
which  mark  is  given  her  by  Christ  himself;  in 
whose  person  Solomon  speaking,  says  :  "Una  est 
columba  mea  ;"  that  is,  "  one  is  my  dove,"  or 
"  my  dove  is  one."  Instead  of  this,  they,  being 
themselves  full  of  sects  and  divisions,  Avill  have 
it,  "  my  dove  is  alone  ;"  though  neither  the  He- 
brew nor  Greek  word  hath  that  signification  ; 
but,  on  the  contrary,  as  properly  signifies  one,  as 
unus  doth  in  Latin.  But  this  is  also  amended 
in  their  last  translation. 


(3)  Nor  was  it  enough  for  them  to  corrupt  the 
scripture  against  the  church's  unity  ;  for  there 
was  a  time  when  their  congregation  was  invisi- 
ble ;  that  is  to  say,  when  "  they  were  not  at  all :" 
and  therefore,  because  they  will  have  it,  that 
Christ  may  be  without  his  church,  to  wit,  a  head 
without  a  body,  (d)  they  falsify  this  place  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  Eph.,  xi.  21,  23,  translating, 
"  he  gave  him  to  be  the  head  over  all  things  to 
the  church,"  congregation  with  them,  "  which 
(church)  is  his  body,  the  fulness  of  him  that 
filleth  all  in  all."  Here  they  translate  actively 
the  Greek  word  t5  nXrjoufievu,  when,  according  to 
St.  Chrysostom,  and  all  the  Greek  and  Latin 
doctors'  interpretation,  it  ought  to  be  translated 
passively  ;  so  that  instead  of  saying,  "  and  filleth 
all  in  all,"  they  should  say,  "  the  fulness  of  him 
which  is  filled  all  in  all  ;"  all  faithful  men  as 
members,  and  the  whole  church  as  the  body 
concurring  to  the  fulness  of  Christ  the  head. 
But  thus  they  will  not  translate,  "  because,"  says 
Beza,  "  Christ  needs  no  such  compliment."  And 
if  he  need  it  not,  then  he  may  be  without  a 
church ;  and  consequently,  it  is  no  absurdity,  if 
the  church  has  been  for  many  years  not  only 
invisible,  but  also,  "  not  at  all."  Would  a  man 
easily  imagine  that  such  secret  poison  could  lurk 
in  their  translations  ?  Thus  they  deal  with  the 
church  ;  let  us  now  see  how  they  use  particular 
points  of  doctrine. 


(d)  Protestants  will  have  Christ  to  be  a  head  without 
a  body,  during  all  that  time  that  their  congregation  was 
invisible,  viz.,  about  1500  years. 


42 


II.  PROTESTANT  TRANSLATIONS  AGAINST 


The  Book, 

Chapter, 

and  Verse. 


St.  Matth. 
chap.  xxvi. 
verse   26. 


St.  Mark, 
chap.  xiv. 
verse  22. 


Acts  of 
the  Apos. 
chap.  iii. 
verse  21. 


Jeremiah 
chap.  xi. 
verse  19. 


Genesis 
chap.  xiv. 
verse  18. 


The  Vulgate  Latin  Text. 


Accepit  Jesus  pa- 
rtem et  "  benedixit," 
xai  ivXoyricrag,  ac /re- 
git, dedilque,  <$fc.(\) 


Accepit  Jesus  pa- 
rtem et  "benedicens," 
xai  £vXoyJ[Oag:<$-c.(2) 


Quern  oportet  qui- 
dem  ccelum  "  sicsci- 
pere"  usque  in  tem- 
pora  restitutions 
omnium,  dv  del  dgd. 
vov  di^aadai.  (3) 


Mittamus  lignum 
in  pancm  ejus.  (4) 


At  vero  Melchize- 
dek,  sex  Salem,  pro- 
ferens  panem  et  vi- 
num,  "  erat  enim 
sacerdos  Dei  Altis- 
simi."  (5) 


The  true  English  accord- 
ing to  the  Rhemish 
Translation. 


Jesus  took  bread 
and  "  blessed,"  and 
brake,  and  gave  to 
his  disciples. 


Jesus  took  bread, 
and  "blessing,"  &c. 


Whom  heaven  tru- 
ly must  "  receive," 
until  the  times  of 
the  restitution  of  all 
things. 


Let  us  cast  wood 
upon  his  bread. 


And  Melchizedek, 
king  of  Salem, 
brought  forth  bread 
and  wine  ;  "  for  he 
was  the  priest  of 
God  most  high." 


Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 
testant Bibles,  printed 
A.  D.  1562,  1577,  1579. 


Instead  of  "  bless- 
ed," they  translate, 
"  and  when  he  had 
given  thanks."  (1) 


Instead  of  "  bless- 
ing," they  say,  "and 
when  he  had  given 
thanks."  (2) 


Instead  of  "receive," 
they  say,  whom  hea- 
ven must "  contain." 
And  Beza,  "  who 
must  be  contained 
in  heaven."  (3) 


"  We  will  destroy 
his  meat  with  wood." 
In  another  Bible, 
"  Let  us  destroy  the 
tree  with  the  fruit." 
(4) 


Instead  of  "  for 
he  was  the  priest," 
they  translate,  "and 
he  was  the  priest," 
&c.  (5) 


The  last  Translation   of 

the  Protestant  Bible,  Ed. 

Lon.,  an.  10*83, 


Corrected. 


Corrected. 


Corrected. 


Let  us  destroy  the 
tree  with  the  fruit 
thereof.' 


Instead  of  "for," 
they  translate  "and." 


THE    BLESSED    SACRAMENT    AND    SACRIFICE    OF    THE    MASS. 


43 


(1)  The  turning  of  blessings  into  bare  thanks- 
giving, was  one  of  the  first  steps  of  our  pre- 
tended reformers,  towards  denying  the  real  pre- 
sence. By  endeavouring  to  take  away  the  operation 
and  efficacy  of  Christ's  blessing,  pronounced  upon 
the  bread  and  wine,  they  would  make  it  no  more 
than  a  thanksgiving  to  God  :  and  that,  not  only 
in  translating  thanksgiving  for  blessing,  but  also 
in  urging  the  word  eucharist,  to  prove  it  a  mere 
thanksgiving ;  though  we  find  the  verb  Bv/ugigsiv 
used  also  transitively  by  the  Greek  fathers, 
saying,  iov  aoxov  ivxaQiq^devia,  panem,  et  chali- 
cem  eucharistisatos  ;  or,  panem,  in  quo  gratia?  actee 
sunt ;  that  is,  "  the  bread  and  cup  made  the 
eucharist ;"  "  the  bread,  over  which  thanks  are 
given  ;"  that  is,  "  which,  by  the  word  of  prayer 
and  thanksgiving  is  made  a  consecrated  meat, 
the  flesh  and  blood  of  Christ."  (a)  St.  Paul 
also,  speaking  of  this  sacrament,  calls  it,  (1  Cor. 
x.)  "  the  chalice  of  benediction,  which  we  do 
bless  ;"  which  St.  Cyprian  thus  explicates,  "  the 
chalice  consecrated  by  solemn  blessing."  St. 
Basil  and  St.  Chrysostom,  in  their  liturgies,  say 
thus,  "  Bless,  O  Lord,  the  sacred  bread  ;"  and 
"bless,  O  Lord,  the  sacred  cup,  changing  it  by 
thy  Holy  Spirit :"  where  are  signified  the  conse- 
cration and  transmutation  thereof  into  the  body 
and  blood  of  Christ. 


(2)  And,  by  this  corrupt  translation,  they 
would  have  Christ  so  included  in  heaven,  that 
he  cannot  be  with  us  upon  the  altar.  But  Beza 
confesses,  "  that  he  translates  it  thus,  on  pur- 
pose to  keep  Christ's  presence  from  the  altar  ;" 
which  is  so  far  from  the  Greek,  that  not  only  Illy- 
ricus,  but  even  Calvin  himself,  dislikes  it.  And 
you  may  easily  judge,  how  contrary  to  St.  Chry- 
sostom it  is,  who  tells  us,  "  that  Christ  ascending 
into  heaven,  both  left  us  his  flesh,  and  yet  ascend- 
ing hath  the  same."  And  again,  "  O  miracle  !" 
says  he,  "  he  that  sits  above  with  the  Father  in  the 
same  moment  of  time  is  handled  with  the  hands 
of  all."  (b)  This,  you  see,  is  the  faith  and 
doctrine  of  the  ancient  fathers  ;  and  it  is  the 
faith  of  the  Catholic  Church  at  this  day.  Who 
sees  not,  that  this  faith,  thus  to  believe  the  pre- 
sence of  Christ  is  in  both  places  at  once,  because 
he  is  omnipotent,  is  far  greater  than  the  Pro- 
testant faith,  which  believes  no  farther  than  that 
he  is  ascended ;  and  that  therefore  he  cannot 
be  present  upon  the  altar,  nor  dispose  of  his 
body  as  he  pleases  1  If  we  should  ask  them, 
whether  he  was  also  in  heaven,  when  he  appeared 
to  Saul  going  to  Damascus  ;  or  whether  he  can 
be  both  in  heaven,  and  with  his  church  on  earth, 
to  the  end  of  the  world,  as  he  promised  ;  per- 
haps, by  this  doctrine  of  theirs,  they  would  be 
put  to  a  stand.  (3) 


Consider   further,   how   plain   our    Saviour's 
words,  "  this  is  my  body,"  are  for  the  real  pre- 


(«)  St.  Justin  in  fine,  2  Apolog.,  St.  Irenaeus,  lib.  4,  34. 
(b)  Horn.  2,  ad  popul.  Antioch.,  lib.  3,  de  Saceidotio. 


sence  of  his  body  :  and  for  the  real  presence  of 
his  blood  in  the  chalice,  what  can  be  more 
plainly  spoken,  than  "  this  is  the  chalice,  the 
New  Testament  in  my  blood,  which  chalice  is 
shed  for  you."  (c)  According  to  the  Greek,  ro 
noTTjQiov  to  Exxuvofisvov,  the  word  "which"  must 
needs  be  referred  to  the  chalice  :  in  which 
speech  chalice  cannot  otherwise  be  taken,  than 
for  that  in  the  chalice  ;  which  sure,  must  needs 
be  the  blood  of  Christ,  and  not  wine,  because  his 
blood  only  was  shed  for  us  ;  according  to  St. 
Chrysostom,  who  says  :  "  That  which  is  in  the 
chalice  is  the  same  which  gushed  out  of  his 
side."  (d)  And  this  deduction  so  troubled  Beza, 
that  he  exclaims  against  all  the  Greek  copies  in 
the  world,  as  corrupted  in  this  place. 


(4)  "  Let  us  cast  wood  upon  his  bread ;" 
"  that  is,"  saith  St.  Hierom,  (c)  "  the  cross  upon 
the  body  of  our  Saviour  ;  for  it  is  he  that  said, 
I  am  the  bread  that  descended  from  heaven." 
Where  the  prophet  so  long  before,  saying  bread, 
and  meaning  his  body,  alludes  prophetically  to 
his  body  in  the  blessed  sacrament,  made  of 
bread,  and  under  the  form  of  bread ;  and  there- 
fore also  called  bread  by  the  apostle,  (1  Cor.  x.) 
so  that  both  in  the  prophet  and  the  apostle,  his 
bread  and  his  body  is  all  one.  And  lest  we 
should  think  the  bread  only  signifies  his  body, 
he  says,  "  Let  us  put  the  cross  upon  his  bread  ;" 
that  is,  upon  his  very  natural  body  that  hung  on 
the  cross.  It  is  evident,  that  the  Hebrew  verb 
is  not  now  the  same  with  that  which  the  seventy 
interpreters  translated  into  Greek,  and  St 
Hierom  into  Latin  ;  but  altered,  as  may  be  sup- 
posed, by  the  Jews,  to  obscure  this  prophecy  of 
their  crucifying  Christ  upon  the  cross.  And 
though  Protestants  will  needs  take  the  advan- 
tage of  this  corruption,  yet  so  little  does  the 
Hebrew  word,  that  now  is,  agree  with  the  words 
following,  that  they  cannot  so  translate  it,  as  to 
make  any  commodious  sense  or  understanding 
of  it ;  as  appears  by  their  different  translations, 
and  their  transposing  their  words  in  English, 
otherwise  than  they  are  in  the  Hebrew.  ( f) 


(5)  If  Protestants  should  grant  Melchize- 
dek's  typical  sacrifice  of  bread  and  wine,  then 
would  follow  also,  a  sacrifice  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament ;  which,  to  avoid,  they  purposely  translate 
"  and"  in  this  place  ;  when,  in  other  places,  the 
same  Hebrew  particle  vau,  they  translate  enim, 
for  ;  not  being  ignorant,  that  it  is  in  those,  as  in 
this  place,  better  expressed  by  "for"  or  "because," 
than  by  "  and."  See  the  exposition  of  the  fathers 
upon  it.  (g) 


(c)  Luke  xxii.  v.  20. 

(d)  St.  Chrysost.  in  1  Cor.,  cap.  x.,  Horn.  24. 

(e)  St.  Hierom.  in  com.  in  cap.  xi.  vers.  19,  Hierom. 
Prophetae. 

(/)  Genes,  xx.  3  ;  Gen.  xxs  27  ;  Isaiah  lxiv.  5. 
(g)  St.  Cypr.,  Epist.  63,  Epiphan.  Hasr.  55  et  79.    St. 
Hierom.  in  Matth.  xxvi.,  et  in  EpLst.  ad  Evagrium. 


44 


III.  TROTESTANT  TRANSLATIONS  AGAINST 


The  Book, 

Chapter, 

and  Verse. 


Proverbs 
chap. ix. 
verse  5. 


Proverbs 
chap.  ix. 
verse  1. 


1  Corinth, 
chap.  xi. 
verse  27. 


1  Corinth, 
chap.  ix. 
verse  13. 


1  Corinth, 
chap.  x. 
verse  18. 


Daniel 
chap.  xiv. 
verse  12. 


Et  verse  17 


Et  etiam 
verse  20. 


The  Vulgate  Latin  Text. 


Venite  comedite  pa- 
rtem meum,  et  bibite 
vinum  quod  "miscui" 
vobis,  xsxe§vcxaf*lo'n. 

(1) 


Immolavit  victimas 
suas,  miscuit  vinum, 
exsQuoEV.  (2) 


Itaque  quicunque 
manducaverit  panem 
hunc,  vel,  r\,  biberit 
calicem  domini  in- 
digne,  <$fc.  (3) 


Et  qui  altari  de- 
serviunt  cum  altari 
participant,  Ovaiagr^- 


Nonne  qui  edunt 
hostias  participes, 
sunt  altaris  ?  duai- 
agyqiu.  (5) 


Quia  fecer ant  sub- 
mensa  absconditum 
introitum,  Tqane'Qct. 
(6) 


Intuitus  rex  men- 
sam. 


Et     consumebant 
qua  erant  sypcr  men- 


Thc  true  English  accord- 
ing to  the  Rhemish 
Translation. 


Come,  eat  my 
bread,  and  drink 
the  wine  which  I 
have  "  mingled"  for 
you. 


She  hath  immola- 
ted her  hosts,  she 
hath  "  mingled"  her 
wine. 


Therefore,  whoso- 
ever shall  eat  this 
bread,  "  or"  drink 
the  chalice  of  our 
Lord  unworthily, 
&c. 


And  they  that  serve 
the  "  altar,"  partici- 
pate with  the"altar." 


Those  that  eat  the 
hosts,  are  they  not 
partakers  of  the 
"  altar  ?" 


For  they  had  made 
a  privy  entrance  un- 
der the  "  table." 


The  king  behold- 
ing the  "  table." 


And  they  did  con- 
sume the  things 
which  were  upon 
the  "  table." 


Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 
testant Bibles,  printed 
A.  D.  1562,  1577,  1579. 


The  corruption  is, 
drink  the  winewhich 
I  have  "  drawn  ;" 
instead  of  "  min- 
gled."(l) 


She  hath  "drawn" 
her  wine.  (2) 


Instead  of  "  al- 
tar," they  translate 
"temple."  (4) 


Partakers  of  the 
"  temple.  (5) 


For,  "  under  the 
table,"  they  say,  un- 
der the  "  altar."  (6) 


The  king  behold- 
ing the  "  altar." 


Which  was  upon 
the  "  altar." 


The  last  Translation  of 

the  Protestant  Bible,  Ed. 

Lon.,  an.  1683. 


Come,  eat  of  my 
bread,  and  drink  of 
the  wine  which  I 
have  "  mingled." 


She  hath  killed 
her  beasts,  she  hath 
mingled  her  wine. 


Wherefore,  who- 
soever shall  eat  this 
bread,  "  and"  drink 
this  cup  of  the  Lord 
unworthily,  &c. 


Corrected. 


Corrected. 


The  two  last  chap- 
ters they  call  Apo- 
crypha. 


THE  BLESSED  SACRAMENT  AND  THE  ALTAR. 


45 


(1,  2)  These  prophetical  words  of  Solomon 
are  of  great  importance,   as  being  a  manifest 
prophecy  of  Christ's  mingling  water  and  wine 
in  the  chalice   at  his  last  supper  ;  which  at  this 
day,  the  Catholic  Church  observes  :  but   Pro- 
testants, counting  it  an  idle   ceremony,  frame 
their  translation  accordingly  ;  suppressing   alto- 
gether this  mixture  or  mingling,  contrary  to  the 
true  interpretation  both  of  the   Greek  and  He- 
brew :  as  also,   contrary  to  the  ancient  fathers' 
exposition   of  this  place.     "  The    Holy   Ghost 
(says  St.   Cyprian)  by  Solomon,   foreshoweth  a  ! 
type  of  our  Lord's   sacrifice,  of  the  immolated  j 
host  of  bread  and  wine  ;  saying,   Wisdom  hath  I 
killed  her  hosts,  she  hath  mingled  her  wine  into  J 
the  cup  ;  come  ye,  eat  my  bread,  and  drink  the 
wine  that  I  have  mingled  for  you."  (a)     Speak-  | 
ing  of  wine  mingled  (saith  this  holy  doctor)  he  i 
foreshoweth  prophetically,  the  cup  of  our  Lord 
mingled  with  water  and  wine,  (b)     St.   Justin,  | 
from  the  same  Greek  word,  calls  it,  xqaftu  ;  that  ] 
is,  (according  to  Plutarch)  wine   mingled  with  ! 
water  :  so  likewise  does  St.  Irenaeus.  (c)     See 
also  the  sixth  general  council,  (J)  treating  largely 
hereof,  and   deducing  it   from  the  apostles  and 
ancient   fathers  ;    and   interpreting   this   Greek 
word  by  another   equivalent,   and   more   plainly 
signifying  this  mixture,  viz.,  mywvat. 

(3)  In  this  place,  they  very  falsely  translate 
"  and,"  instead  of  "  or,"  contrary  both  to  the 
Greek  and  Latin.  And  this  they  do  on  purpose, 
to  infer  a  necessity  of  communicating  under  both 
kinds,  as  the  conjunctive  "  and"  may  seem  to  do  : 
whereas,  by  the  disjunctive  "or"  it  is  evident,  that 
we  may  communicate  in  one  kind  only  ;  as  was, 
in  divers  cases,  the  practice  of  the  primitive 
church;  as  also  of  the  apostles  themselves. 
(Act.  ii.  42,  and  xx.  7.) 

But  the  practice  of  our  Saviour  is  the  best 
witness  of  his  doctrine  :  who,  silting  at  the  table 
at  Emaus  (c)  with  two  of  his  disciples,  "  took 
bread,  and  blessed,  and  brake  it,  and  did  reach 
to  them."  By  which  St.  Augustine  and  (/)  the 
other  fathers,  understand  the  eucharist :  where 
no  mention  is  made  of  wine,  or  the  chalice  :  but 
the  reaching  of  the  bread,  their  knowing  him, 
and  his  vanishing  away,  so  joined,  that  not  any 
time  is  left  for  the  benediction  and  consecration 
of  the  chalice. 

In  the  primitive  times,  "  it  was  the  custom  to 
administer  the  blood  only  to  children,"  as  St. 
Cyprian  tells  us :  and,  both  he  and  Tertullian 
say,  "  that  it  was  their  practice,  most  commonly, 
to  reserve  the  body  of  Christ ;"  which,  as  Euse- 
bius  witnesses,  "  they  were  wont  to  give  alone 

(a)  Ep.  63,  2. 

(6)  Apol.  2,  in  fine. 

(c)  St.  Irenaeus,  lib.  5,  prop.  Init. 

(d)  Concil.  Constantinop.,  6,  Can.  32, 

(e)  Luke  xxiv.  30 ;  Lib.  3,  de  Consensu. 

(/)  Hier.  Epitaph.  Pauke.  Beda.  Theophylact.  St.  Cy- 
prian'. 1.  de  lapsis,  n.  10  ;  Tertul  ,  1.  2,  ad  Ux.,  n.  4  ; 
Euseb.  Eccl.  Hist,  1.  6  c.  36;  St.  Basil,  Ep.  ad  Ceesa- 
riara  Patritiam. 

7 


to  sick  people,  for  their  viaticum."  Also,  "  the 
holy  hermits  in  the  wilderness,  commonly  re- 
ceived and  reserved  the  blessed  body  alone,  and 
not  the  blood,"  as  St.  Basil  tells  us. 

For  whole  Christ  is  really  present,  under 
either  kind,  as  Protestants  themselves  have 
confessed  :  read  their  words  in  Hospinian,  (g) 
a  Protestant,  who  affirms,  "  that  they  believed 
and  confessed  whole  Christ  to  be  really  present, 
exhibited  and  received  under  either  kind  ;  and 
therefore  under  the  only  form  of  bread  :  neither 
did  they  judge  those  to  do  evil,  who  communi- 
cated under  one  kind."  And  Luther,  as  alleged 
by  Hospinian,  {h)  says,  "  that  it  is  not  needful  to 
oive  both  kinds  ;  but  as  one  alone  sufficeth,  the 
church  has  power  of  ordaining  only  one,  and 
the  people  ought  to  be  content  therewith,  if  it 
be  ordained  by  the  church."  Whence  it  is 
granted,  that,  "  it  is  lawful  for  the  Church  of  God, 
upon  just  occasions,  absolutely  to  determine  or 
limit  the  use  thereof." 


(4,  5)  To  translate  temple  instead  of  altar, 
is  so  gross  a  corruption,  that  had  it  not  been 
done  thrice  immediately  within  two  chapters, 
one  would  have  thought  it  had  been  done  through 
oversight,  and  not  on  purpose.  The  name  of 
altar  both  in  Hebrew  and  Greek,  and  by  the 
custom  of  all  people,  both  Jews  and  Pagans, 
implies  and  imports  a  sacrifice.  We  therefore, 
with  respect  to  the  sacrifice  of  Christ's  body  and 
blood,  say  altar,  rather  than  table,  as  all  the  an- 
cient fathers  were  accustomed  to  speak  and 
write ;  though,  with  respect  to  eating  and 
drinking  Christ's  body  and  blood,  it  is  also 
called  a  table.  But  because  Protestants  will 
have  only  a  communion  of  bread  and  wine,  or  a 
supper,  and  no  sacrifice  ;  therefore,  they  call  it 
table  only,  and  abhor  the  word  altar,  as  papis- 
tical ;  especially  in  the  first  translation  of  1562, 
which  was  made  when  they  were  throwing  down 
altars  throughout  England. 


(6)  Where  the  name  altar  should  be,  they 
suppress  it  ;  and  here,  where  it  should  not  be, 
they  put  it  in  their  translations  ;  and  that  thrice 
in  one  chapter ;  and  that  either  on  purpose  to 
dishonour  Catholic  altars,  or  else  to  save  the 
credit  of  their  communion  table  ;  as  fearing,  lest 
the  name  of  Bell's  table  might  redound  to  the 
dishonour  of  their  communion  table.  Wherein 
it  is  to  be  wondered,  how  they  could  imagine 
it  any  disgrace  either  for  table  or  altar,  if  the 
idols  also  had  their  tables  and  altars  ;  whereas 
St.  Paul  so  plainly  names  both  together  :  "  The 
table  of  our  Lord,  and  the  table  of  devils,  (i) 
If  the  table  of  devils,  why  not  the  table  of  Bell  ? 
By  this  we  see,  how  light  a  thing  it  was  with 
them  to  corrupt  the  scriptures  in  those  days. 


(#)  Hospin.  Hist.  Sacram.,  p.  2,  fol.  112. 
(A)Ib.,fol.  12. 
(i)  1.  Cor.  x.  21. 


46 


IV. rROTESTANT    TRANSLATIONS    AGAINST 


The  Book, 

Chapter, 

and  Verse. 


Acts  of 
the  Apos. 
chap.  xv. 
verse  2. 


Titus, 
chap.  i. 
verse  5. 


1  Timoth. 
chap.  v. 
verse  17. 


1  Timoth. 
chap.  v. 
verse  19. 


The  Vulgate  Latin  Text. 


St.  James, 
chap.  v. 
verse  14. 


Statuerunt  ut  as- 
ccnderent  Paulus  et 
Barnabas,  et  quidain 
alii  ex  aliis  ad  Apos- 
tolos  ct  "p?-psbyteros" 
nQEcrfivteQug,  in  Jeru- 
salem,  <$fC. 


Hujus  rei  gratia 
rcliqui  te  Cretan,  ttt 
ca  quae  desunt  corri- 
gas,  et  constituas per 
civitates  "  presbyte- 
ros,"  sicut  et  ego  dis- 
posui  tibi. 


The  true  English  accord- 
ing to  the  Rhcmish 
Translation. 


Qui  bene  preesunt 
11  presbyteri,"  duplici 
honore  dignihabean- 
tur. 


Adversus  "  pres 
byterwn"  accusatio- 
nem  noli  recipere,  Sfc. 


Infirmatur  quis  in 
vobis?  inducat  "pres- 
byteros  ecclesia"  et 
orent  super  eum. 


They  appointed  that 
Paul  and  Barnabas 
should  go  up,  and 
certain  others  of  the 
rest,  to  the  apostles 
and  "  priests"  unto 
Jerusalem. 


Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 
testant Bibles,  printed 
A.  D.  1562,  1577,  1579. 


For  this  cause 
left  I  thee  in  Crete, 
that  thou  shouldest 
reform  the  things 
that  are  wanting, 
and  shouldest  ordain 
"  priests,"  by  cities, 
as  I  also  appointed 
thee. 


The  "  priests"  that 
rule  well,  let  them 
be  esteemed  worthy 
of  double  honour. 


Against  a  "priest" 
receive  not  accusa- 
tion, &c. 


Is  any  man  sick 
among  you  ?  let  him 
bring  in  the"'priests" 
of  the  church,  and 
let  them  pray  over 
him. 


Instead  of  "priests," 
they  translate  "  el- 
ders." 


The  last  Translation  of 

the  Protestant  Bible,  Ed. 

Lon.,  an.  1683. 


For  "priests"  they 
say  here  also  "  el- 
ders." 


Instead  of  "priests." 
they  translate  "  el- 
ders." 


For  "priests"  they 
say  "  elders." 


The  "  elders"  that 
rule  well,  &c. 


Against  an  "elder" 
receive  not  accusa- 
tion, &c. 


Let  him 

bring  in  the  "elders" 
of  the  "  congrega- 
tion, &c. 


"  Elders"  also  in. 
tliis  Bible 


Instead  of  "priest' 
they  put  "  elder  *' 


Elders  for  "priests" 
here  also. 


PRIESTS    AND    PRIESTHOOD. 


47 


St.  Augustine  affirms,  "  That  in  the  divine 
scripture  several  sacrifices  are  mentioned,  some 
before  the  manifestation  of  the  New  Testament, 
&c,  and  another  now,  which  is  agreeable  to  this 
manifestation,  &c,  and  which  is  demonstrated 
not  only  from  the  evangelical,  but  also  from  the 
prophetical  writings."  (a)  A  truth  most  certain  ; 
our  sacrifice  of  the  New  Testament  being  most 
clearly  proved  from  the  sacrifice  of  Melchizedek 
in  the  Old  Testament ;  of  whom,  and  whose 
sacrifice,  it  is  said,  "  But  Melchizedek,  king  of 
Salem,  brought  forth  bread  and  wine  ;  for  he 
was  the  priest  of  God  most  high,  and  he  blessed 
him,"  &c.  And  to  make  the  figure  agree  to  the 
jhing  figured,  and  the  truth  to  answer  the  figure 
of  Christ,  it  is  said,  "  Our  Lord  hath  sworn,  and 
it  shall  not  repent  him  ;  thou  art  a  priest  for 
ever,  according  to  the  order  of  Melchizedek."  In 
the  New  Testament,  Jesus  is  made  an  "  high 
priest,  according  to  the  order  of  Melchizedek." 
For  according  to  the  similitude  of  Melchizedek, 
there  arises  another  priest,  who  continues  for 
ever,  and  has  an  everlasting  priesthood.  Whence 
it  is  clearly  proved,  that  Melchizedek  was  a 
priest,  and  offered  bread  and  wine  as  a  sacrifice  ; 
therein  prefiguring  Christ  our  Saviour,  and  his 
sacrifice  daily  offered  in  the  church,  under  the 
forms  of  bread  and  wine,  by  an  everlasting 
priesthood. 


But  the  English  Protestants,  on  purpose  to 
abolish  the  holy  sacrifice  of  the  mass,  did  not 
only  take  away  the  word  altar  out  of  the  scrip- 
ture ;  but  they  also  suppressed  the  name  priest, 
in  all  their  translations,  turning  it  into  elder ;  (b) 
well  knowing  that  these  three,  priest,  sacri- 
fice, and  altar,  are  dependents  and  consequents 
one  of  another  ;  so  that  they  cannot  be  separ- 
ated. If  there  be  an  external  sacrifice,  there 
must  be  an  extenal  priesthood  to  offer  it, 
and  an  altar  to  offer  the  same  upon.  So 
Christ  himself  being  a  priest,  according  to 
the  order  of  Melchizedek,  had  a  sacrifice,  "  his 
body  ;"  and  an  altar,  "  his  cross,"  on  which  he 
offered  it.  And  because  he  instituted  this  sacri- 
fice, to  continue  in  his  church  for  ever,  in  com- 
memoration and  representation  of  his  death, 
therefore,  did  he  ordain  his  apostles  priests,  at 
his  last  supper  ;  where  and  when  he  instituted 
the  holy  order  of  priesthood  or  priests,  (saying, 
hoc  facite,  "  do  this,")  to  offer  the  self-same 
sacrifice  in  a  mystical  and  unbloody  manner, 
until  the  world's  end. 


But  our  new  pretended  reformers  have  made 
the  scriptures  quite  dumb,  as  to  the  name  of  any 
such  priest  or  priesthood  as  we  now  speak  of ; 
never  so  much  as  once  naming  priest,  unless 

(a)  St.  August.,  Ep.  49,  q.  3. 

(b)  Psal.  ex.  4;  Heb.  vi.  20,  and  chap.  vii.  15,  17,  24. 


when  mention  is  made  either  of  the  priests  of  the 
Jews,  or  the  priests  of  the  Gentiles,  especially 
when  such  are  reprehended  or  blamed  in  the 
holy  scripture  ;  and  in  such  places  they  are  sure 
to  name  priests  in  their  translations,  on  purpose 
to  make  the  very  name  of  priests  odious  among 
the  common  ignorant  people.  Again,  they  have 
also  the  name  priests,  when  they  are  taken  for 
all  manner  of  men,  women,  or  children,  that 
offer  internal  and  spiritual  sacrifices  ;  whereby 
they  would  falsely  signify,  that  there  are  no  other 
priests  in  the  law  of  grace.  As  Whitaker,  (c) 
one  of  their  great  champions,  freely  avouches, 
directly  contrary  to  St.  Augustine,  who,  in  one 
brief  sentence,  distinguishes  priests,  properly  so 
called  in  the  church  ;  and  priests,  as  it  is  a 
common  name  to  all  Christians.  This  name 
then  of  priest  and  priesthood,  properly  so  called, 
as  St.  Augustine  says,  they  wholly  suppress  ; 
never  translating  the  word  Presbyteros  "  priests," 
but  "  elders  ;"  and  that  with  so  full  and  general 
consent  in  all  their  English  Bibles,  that,  as  the 
Puritans  plainly  confess,  and  Mr.  Whitgift  de- 
nies it  not,  a  man  would  wonder  to  see  how 
careful  they  are,  that  the  people  may  not  once 
hear  of  the  name  of  any  such  priest  in  all  the 
holy  scriptures :  and  even  in  their  latter  trans- 
lations, though  they  are  ashamed  of  the  word 
"  eldership,"  yet  they  have  not  the  power  to  put 
the  English  word  priesthood,  as  they  ought  to 
do,  in  the  text,  that  the  vulgar  may  understand 
it,  but  rather  the  Greek  word  presbytery  :  such 
are  the  poor  shifts  they  are  glad  to  make  use 
of. 

-  -ILj 


So  blinded  were  these  innovators  with  heresy, 
that  they  could  not  see  how  the  holy  scriptures, 
the  fathers,  and  ecclesiastical  custom,  have 
drawn  several  words  from  their  profane  and 
common  signification,  to  a  more  peculiar  and 
ecclesiastical  one;  as  Episcopus,  which  in  Tully 
is  an  "  overseer,"  is  a  bishop  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment ;  so  the  Greek  word,  xeiqotovsiv,  signifying 
"  ordain,"  they  translate  as  profanely,  as  if  they 
were  translating  Demosthenes,  or  the  Laws  ot 
Athens,  rather  than  the  holy  scriptures  ;  when, 
as  St.  Hierom  tells  them,  (d)  it  signifieth 
Clericorum  ordinationem  ;  that  is,  "  giving  of 
holy  orders,"  which  is  done  not  only  by  prayer 
of  the  voice,  but  by  imposition  of  the  hands," 
according  to  St.  Paul  to  Timothy,  "  Impose 
hands  suddenly  on  no  man  ;"  that  is,  "  Be  not 
hasty  to  give  holy  orders."  In  like  manner 
they  translate  minister  for  deacon,  ambassador 
for  apostle,  messenger  for  angel,  &c,  leaving, 
I  say,  the  ecclesiastical  use  of  the  word  for  the 
original  signification. 


(c)  Whitaker,  p.  199;  St.  Aug.,  lib.  20,  de  Civit.  Dei, 
cap.  10.  See  the  Puritan's  Reply,  p.  159,  and  Whitgift's 
Defence  against  the  Puritans,  p.  722. 

(i)  St.  Hierom.  in  cap.  lviii.  Esai. 


48 


V. PROTESTANT  TRANSLATIONS  AGAINST 


The  Book, 

Chapter, 

and  Verse. 


Acts  of 
the  Apos. 

chap.  xivr. 
verse  22. 


1  Timoth. 
chap.  iv. 
verse  14. 


2  Timoth. 
chap.  i. 
verse  6. 


1  Timoth. 
chap.  iii. 
verse  8. 


The  Vulgate  Latin  Text. 


Et  verse  12 


Et  cum  constitu- 
issent,  xetqoxovTjoav- 
tsq,  Mis  per  sin- 
gulas  "  ecclesias" 
"presbyteros,"  Ttqea- 
pvtsga;,  (1) 


Noli  negligere 
"gratiarn"  xctQiofia- 
too,  qua  in  te  est, 
qucs  data  est  tibiper 
prophetiam  cum  im- 
positions manuum 
*' presbyterii."  (2) 


Propter  quam  cau- 
sam  admoneo  te,  ut 
resuscitcs  "gratiarn" 
Dei,  quce  in  te  est 
per  impositionem 
manuum  mearum. 


The  true  English  accord- 
ing to  the  Rhemish 
Translation. 


"  Diaconos"  si- 
militer "  pudicos," 
non  bilingues,  SfC, 
Jiaxovsg.  (3) 


Aiaxovoi,  diaconi.(4) 


And  when  they  had 
ordained  to  them 
"  priests"  in  every 
"  church." 


Neglect  not  the 
"  grace"  that  is  in 
thee,  which  is  given 
thee  by  prophesy, 
with  imposition  of 
the  hands  of  "priest- 
hood." 


Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 
testant Bibles,  printed 
a.  d.  15C2,  1577,  1579. 


For  the  which 
cause  I  admonish 
thee,that  thou  resus- 
citate the  "  grace" 
of  God,  which  is  in 
thee,  by  the  imposi- 
tion of  my  hands. 


"Deacons"  in  like 
manner  "  chaste," 
not  double-tongued, 
&c. 


Deacons. 


And  when  they 
had  ordained  "  el- 
ders by  election,"  in 
every  "  congrega- 
tion." (1) 


Instead  of  "grace," 
they  translate  "gift;" 
and  "  eldership"  in- 
stead of  "  priest- 
hood." (2) 


The  last  Translation  of 

the  Protestant  Bible,  Ed. 

Lon.,  an.  1683. 


Instead  of  the 
word  "  grace"  they 
say  "  gift." 


"  Ministers" 
"  deacons."  (3) 


for 


Deacons.  (4) 


"Elders"  set  in  the 
stead  of  "  priests." 


For  the  word 
"  grace"  they  say 
"  gift ;"  and  "  pres- 
bytery," the  Greek 
word,  rather  than 
the  English  word, 
"  priesthood." 


They  translate 
"  gift,"  in  the  stead 
of  "  grace." 


Likewise  must 
the  "  deacons"  be 
"  grave." 


Deacons. 


PRIESTHOOD    AND    HOLY    ORDERS. 


49 


(1)  We  have  heard,  in  old  time,  of  making 
priests  ;  and,  of  late  days,  of  making  ministers  ; 
but  who  has  ever  heard  in  England  of  making 
elders  by  election  ?  yet,  in  their  first  translations, 
it  continued  a  phrase  of  scripture  till  King 
James  the  First's  time ;  and  then  they  thought 
good  to  blot  out  the  words  by  "  election,"  begin- 
ning to  consider,  that  such  elders  as  were  made 
only  by  election,  without  consecration,  could  not 
pretend  to  much  more  power  of  administering 
the  sacraments,  than  a  churchwarden,  or  con- 
stable of  the  parish  ;  for,  if  they  denied  ordina- 
tion to  be  a  sacrament,  (a)  and  consequently, 
to  give  grace,  and  impress  a  character,  doubtless 
they  could  not  attribute  much  to  a  bare  elec- 
tion :  and  yet,  in  those  days,  when  this  transla- 
tion was  made,  their  doctrine  was,  "  that  in  the 
New  Testament,  election,  without  consecration, 
was  sufficient  to  make  a  priest  or  bishop."  Wit- 
ness Cranmer  himself,  who  being  asked,  whether 
in  the  New  Testament  there  is  required  any 
consecration  of  a  bishop  or  priest  ?  answered  thus 
under  his  hand,  viz.,  "  In  the  New  Testament, 
he  that  is  appointed  to  be  a  priest  or  bishop, 
needeth  no  consecration  by  the  scripture  ;  for 
election  thereunto  is  sufficient ;  (b)  and  Dr. 
Stillingfleet  informs  us,  that  Cranmer  has  de- 
clared, "  that  a  governor  could  make  priests,  as 
well  as  bishops."  And  Mr.  Whitaker  tells  us, 
"  that  there  are  no  priests  now  in  the  Church  of 
Christ ;"  page  200,  advers.  Camp,  that  is,  as  he 
interprets  himself,  page  210,  "  this  name  priest 
is  never  in  the  New  Testament  peculiarly  ap- 
plied to  the  ministers  of  the  Gospel."  And  we 
are  not  ignorant,  how  both  King  Edward  the 
Sixth,  and  Queen  Elizabeth,  made  bishops  by 
their  letters  patent  only,  let  our  Lambeth  re- 
cords pretend  what  they  will :  to  authorize  which, 
it  is  no  wonder,  if  they  made  the  scripture  say, 
"  when  they  had  ordained  elders  by  election," 
instead  of  "  priests  by  imposition  of  hands  ;" 
though  contrary  to  the  fourth  Council  of  Car- 
thage, which  enjoins,  "  that  when  a  priest  takes 
his  orders,  the  bishop  blessing  him,  and  holding 
his  hand  upon  his  head,  all  the  priests  also  that 
are  present,  hold  their  hands  by  the  bishop's 
hand,  upon  his  head,  (c)  So  are  our  priests 
made  at  this  day  ;  and  so  would  now  the  clergy 
of  the  Church  of  England  pretend  to  be  made, 
if  they  had  but  bishops  and  priests  able  to  make 
them.  For  which  purpose,  they  have  not  only 
corrected  this  error  in  their  last  translations, 
but  have  also  gotten  the  words,  bishop  and  priest, 
thrust  into  their  forms  of  ordination  :  but  the 
man  that  wants  hands  to  work  with,  is  not  much 
better  for  having  tools. 


(2)  Moreover,  some  of  our  pretenders  to 
priesthood,  would  gladly  have  holy  order  to  take 


(a)  Twenty-fifth  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles. 

(6)  See  Dr.  Burnet's  Hist,  of  the  Refor.;  see  Stilling- 
fleet Irenicon,  p.  392. 

(c)  Council  3,  anno  436,  where  St.  Augustine  was 
present,  and  subscribed. 


its  place  again  among  the  sacraments :  and 
therefore  both  Dr.  Bramhall  and  Mr.  Mason 
reckon  it  for  a  sacrament,  though  quite  contrary 
to  their  scripture  translators,  (d)  who,  lest  it 
should  be  so  accounted,  do  translate  "  gift"  in- 
stead of  "  grace ;"  lest  it  should  appear,  that 
grace  is  given  in  holy  orders.  I  wonder  they 
have  not  corrected  this  in  their  latter  transla- 
tions :  but,  perhaps,  they  durst  not  do  it,  for 
fear  of  making  it  clash  with  the  25th  of  their 
39  Articles.  It  is  no  less  to  be  admired,  that 
since  they  began  to  be  enamoured  of  priesthood, 
they  have  not  displaced  that  profane  intruder, 
"  elder,"  and  placed  the  true  ecclesiastical  word 
"  priest,"  in  the  text.  But  to  this  I  hear  them 
object,  that  our  Latin  translation  hath  Seniores 
et  majores  natu  ;  and  therefore,  why  may  not 
they  also  translate  "  elders  V  To  which  I  an- 
swer, "  that  this  is  nothing  to  them,  who  profess 
to  translate  the  Greek,  and  not  our  Latin  ;  and 
the  Greek  word  they  know  is  txqeo^vieqho presby- 
tcros.  Again,  I  say,  that  if  they  meant  no  worse 
than  the  old  Latin  translator  did,  they  would  be 
as  indifferent  as  he,  to  have  said  sometimes 
priest  and  priesthood,  when  he  has  the  words, 
"  presbyteros"  and  "  presbyterium,"  as  we  are 
indifferent  in  our  translation,  saying,  seniors  and 
ancient,  when  we  find  it  so  in  Latin  :  being  well 
assured,  that  by  sundry  words  he  meant  but  one 
thing,  as  in  Greek  it  is  but  one.  St.  Hierom 
reads,  Presbyteros  ego  compresbyter,  (e)  in  1  ad 
Gal.,  proving  the  dignity  of  priests  :  and  yet 
in  the  4th  of  the  Galatians,  he  reads  according 
to  the  Vulgate  Latin  text :  Seniores  in  vobis  rogo 
consenior  et  ipse :  whereby  it  is  evident,  that 
senior  here,  and  in  the  Acts,  is  a  priest ;  and  not, 
on  the  contrary,  presbyter,  an  elder. 


(3)  In  this  place  they  thrust  the  word  minis- 
ter into  the  text,  for  an  ecclesiastical  order  :  so 
that,  though  they  will  not  have  bishops,  priests, 
and  deacons,  yet  they  would  gladly  have  bishops, 
ministers,  and  deacons ;  yet  the  word  they 
translate  for  minister,  is  diuxdvoo,  diaconus  ;  the 
very  same  that,  a  little  after,  they  translate 
deacon,  (c)  And  so  because  bishops  went 
before  in  the  same  chapter,  they  have  found 
out  three  orders,  bishops,  ministers,  and  deacons. 
How  poor  a  shift  is  this,  that  they  are  forced  to 
make  the  apostles  speak  three  things  for  two,  on 
purpose  to  get  a  place  in  the  scripture  for  their 
ministers  !  As  likewise,  in  another  place,  (/) 
on  purpose  to  make  room  for  their  ministers' 
wives,  for  there  is  no  living  without  them,  they 
translate  wife  instead  of  woman,  making  St. 
Paul  say  :  "  Have  not  we  power  to  lead  about  a 
wife  V  &c,  for  which  cause  they  had  rather  say 
grave  than  chaste. 


(d)  Dr.  Bramh.  p.  96  ;  Mason,  lib.  1. 
(c)  St.  Hier.,  Ep.  85,  ad  Evagr. 
(/)  1  Cor.  ix.  5. 


50 


VI. PROTESTANT  TRANSLATIONS  AGAINST 


The  Book, 

The  true  English  accord- 

Corruptions in  the  Pro- 

The last  Translation  of 

Chapter, 

The  Vulgate  Latin  Text. 

ing  to  the  Rhemish 

testant  Bibles,  printed 

the  Protestant  Bible,  Ed. 

and  Verse. 

Translation. 

a.  D.  1562,  1577,  1579. 

Lon.,  an.  1683. 

Malachi 

Labia  enim  sacer- 

The  priest's  lips 

The   priest's  lips 

For  "  shall"  they 

chap.  ii. 

dotis  cuslodient  sci- 

"  shall"  keep  know- 

"should           keep 

translate   "  should." 

verse  7. 

entiam,  et  legem  re- 

ledge,     and       they 

knowledge,and  they 

And     for     "  angel" 

quirent  ex  ore  ejus  : 

"  shall"     seek    the 

"  should"   seek  the 

"messenger,"  in  this 

quia  "  angelus"  Do- 

law at  his   mouth  ; 

law  at  his   mouth  ; 

also. 

mini  exercituum  est. 

because    he   is   the 

because  he    is   the 

(1) 

"  angel"      of      the 
Lord  of  hosts. 

"  messenger"  of  the 
Lord  of  hosts.  (1) 

Apocalyp. 

"  Angelo"  Ephesi 

To    the    "angel" 

To  the  "  messen- 

Corrected. 

chap.  ii.  iii. 

eccIesicB  scribe. 

of    the    church    of 

ger"  of,  &c,  instead 

verses  1,  8, 
12. 

Ephesus,write  thou. 

of  "  angel." 

Malachi 

Ecce,    ego    mitto 

Behold,     I     send 

"  Instead  of  "  an- 

The   same    also 

chap.  iii. 

" angelum"  meum,Top 

mine  "  angel,"   and 

gel,"  they  say  "mes- 

they translate  here, 

verse  1 . 

uyyelov   fib,  et  pr<B- 

he  shall  prepare  the 

senger."      And   for 

without  any  correc- 

parabit    viam    ante 

way  before  my  face. 

"  Angel"  of  the  tes- 

tion. 

faciem   mcam.       Et 

And       the      Ruler 

tament,  they  trans- 

statim veniet  ad  tem- 

whom  ye  seek,  shall 

late,    "  Messenger" 

plum  suum  Domina- 

suddenly    come    to 

of  the  covenant.  (2) 

tor,  quern  vos  qu&ri- 

his  temple,  even  the 

tis,     et    "Angelus" 

"  Angel"     of      the 

testamenti,         quern 

testament,  whom  ye 

vos  vultis.  (2) 

wish  for. 

St.  Matth. 

Hie   est    enim   de 

For  this  is  he  of 

For  "  angel"  they 

Instead  of   "  an- 

chap. xi. 

quo     scriptum     est, 

whom  it  is  written, 

say  "  messenger." 

gel,"  they  say  "mes- 

verse 10. 

ecce,  ego  mitto  "  an- 
gelum"   meum    ante 

Behold,  I  send  mine 
"  angel"  before  thy 

senger." 

faciem  tuam. 

face. 

Luke 

Hie    est    de    quo 

This    is    he    of 

—  Behold,  I  send 

For       "  angel, " 

chap.  vii. 

scriptum    est,    ecce, 

Whom  it  is  written, 

my     "  messenger," 

"  messenger." 

verse  27. 

mitto      "  angelum  " 
meum,  <Sfc. 

Behold,  I  send  mine 
"  angel,"  &c. 

&c. 

2  Corinth. 

Si     quid     donavi 

If  I  pardoned  any 

—  In  the  "  sight" 

Corrected. 

chap.  ii. 

propter  vos  in  "  per- 

thing for  you  in  the 

of  Christ.  (3) 

verse  10. 

sona"  Christi,sv  noo- 
aoinoi  Xqigu.  (3) 

"  person"  of  Christ. 

THE    AUTHORITY    OF    PRIESTS. 


51 


(1)  Because  our  pretended  reformers  teach, 
"  That  order  is  not  a  sacrament  ;"  "  that  it 
has  neither  visible  sign,"  (what  is  imposition  of 
hands  ?)  "  nor  ceremony  ordained  by  God  ;  nor 
form ;  nor  institution  from  Christ;"  (a)  con- 
sequently, that  it  cannot  imprint  a  character  on 
the  soul  of  the  person  ordained  ;  they  not  only 
avoid  the  word  "  priests,"  in  their  transla- 
tions, but,  the  more  to  derogate  from  the  pri- 
vilege and  dignity  of  priests,  they  make  the 
scripture,  in  this  place,  speak  contrary  to  the 
words  of  the  prophet ;  as  they  are  read  both  in 
the  Hebrew  and  Greek,  (pvl&Zsiai  ix&Trpoow, 
TOpn-1  nEB"1 ;  where  it  is  as  plain  as  can  be  spoken, 
that  "  the  priest's  lips  shall  keep  knowledge,  and 
they  shall  seek  the  law  at  his  mouth  ;"  which  is 
a  wonderful  privilege  given  to  the  priests  of 
the  old  law,  for  true  determination  in  matters 
of  controversy,  and  rightly  expounding  the  law, 
as  we  may  read  more  fully  in  Deuteronomy  the 
17th  chapter,  where  they  are  commanded,  under 
pain  of  death,  to  stand  to  the  priest's  judgment  : 
which,  in  this  place,  verse  4,  God,  by  his  pro- 
phet Malachi,  calls,  "  His  covenant  with  Levi," 
and  that  he  will  have  it  stand,  to  wit,  in  the 
New  Testament,  where  St.  Peter  has  such  pri- 
vilege for  him  and  his  successors,  that  his  faith 
shall  not  fail ;  and  where  the  Holy  Ghost  is 
president  in  the  councils  of  bishops  and  priests. 
All  which,  the  reformers  of  our  days  would 
deface  and  defeat,  by  translating  the  words 
otherwise  than  the  Holy  Ghost  has  spoken  them. 
And  when  the  prophet  adds  immediately  the 
cause  of  this  singular  prerogative  of  the  priest : 
"  because  he  is  the  angel  of  the  Lord  of  hosts," 
which  is  also  a  wonderful  dignity  to  be  so  called  ; 
they  translate  ;  "  because  he  is  the  messenger  of 
the  Lord  of  hosts."  So  do  they  also,  in  the 
Revelations,  call  the  bishops  of  the  seven 
churches  of  Asia,  messengers. 


(2)  And  here,  in  like  manner,  they  call  St. 
John  the  Baptist,  messenger ;  where  the  scrip- 
ture, no  doubt,  speaks  more  ho*  .urably  of  him, 
as  being  Christ's  precursor,  than  of  a  messenger, 
which  is  a  term  for  postboys  and  lacqueys.  The 
scripture,  I  say,  speaks  more  honourably  of 
him  ;  and  our  Saviour,  in  the  Gospel,  telling 
the  people  the  wonderful  dignities  of  St.  John, 
and  that  he  was  more  than  a  prophet,  cites  this 
place,  and  gives  this  reason,  "  For  this  is  he  of 
whom  it  is  written,  Behold,  I  send  my  angel  be- 
fore thee  :"  which  St.  Hierom  calls,  meritorum, 
aliSijot*,  the  "  increase  and  augmenting  of  John's 
merits  and  privileges."  (b)  And  St.  Gregory, 
"  He  who  came  to  bring  tidings  of  Christ  him- 
self, was  worthily  called  an  angel,  that  in  his 
very  name  there  might  be  dignity."     And  all 


(a)  Twenty. fifth  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles.   Roger's 
Defence  of  the  same,  p.  155. 

(b)  St.  Hierom,  in  Comment,  inhunc  locum.  St.  Greg., 
Horn.  6-  in  Erang.  a 


the  fathers  conceive  a  great  excellency  of  this 
word  angel  ;  but  our  Protestants,  who  measure 
all  divine  things  and  persons  by  the  line  of  their 
human  understanding,  translate  accordingly ; 
making  our  Saviour  say,  that  "  John  was  more 
than  a  prophet,"  because  he  was  a  "  messenger." 
Yea,  where  our  blessed  Saviour  himself  is  called 
Angelus  testamenti,  the  Angel  of  the  testament  ; 
there  they  translate,  the  "  messenger  of  the 
covenant." 


St.  Hierom  translated  not  nuntius,  but  an- 
gelus ;  the  church,  and  all  antiquity,  both 
reading  and  expounding  it  as  a  term  of  more 
dignity  and  excellency.  Why  do  the  innovators 
of  our  age  thus  boldly  disgrace  the  very  elo- 
quence of  scripture,  which,  by  such  terms  of 
amplification,  would  speak  more  significantly 
and  emphatically  ?  Why,  I  say,  do  they  for 
angel  translate  messenger  ?  for  apostle,  legate 
or  ambassador,  and  the  like  ?  Doubtless,  this 
is  all  done  to  take  away,  as  much  as  possible,  the 
dignity  and  excellency  of  the  priesthood.  Yet, 
methinks,  they  should  have  corrected  this  in 
their  latter  translations,  when  they  began  them- 
selves to  aspire  to  the  title  of  priests ;  whose 
name,  however,  they  may  usurp,  yet  could  not 
hitherto  attain  to  the  authority  and  power  of 
the  priesthood.  They  are  but  priests  in  name 
only ;  the  power  they  want,  and  therefore  are 
pleased  to  be  content  with  the  ordinary  style  of 
messengers  ;  not  yet  daring  to  term  themselves 
angels,  as  St.  John  did  the  bishops  of  the  seven 
churches  of  Asia. 


(3)  But,  great  is  the  authority,  dignity,  excel- 
lency, and  power  of  God's  priests  and  bishops  : 
they  do  bind  and  loose,  and  execute  all  ecclesi- 
astical functions,  as  in  the  person  and  power  of 
Christ,  whose  ministers  they  are.  So  St.  Paul 
says  :  "  that  when  he  pardoned  or  released  the 
penance  of  the  incestuous  Corinthian,  he  did  it 
in  the  person  ol  Christ ;"  (c)  they  falsely  trans- 
late, "  in  the  sight  of  Christ ;"  "  that  is,  as 
St.  Ambrose  expounds  it,  "  in  the  name  of 
Christ;"  "  in  his  stead,"  and  as  "  his  vicar  and 
deputy  ;"  and  when  he  excommunicated  the  same 
incestuous  person,  he  said,  "  he  did  it  in  tht, 
name,  and  by  virtue  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ."  (d)  And  the  fathers  of  the  Council  of 
Ephesus  avouch,  "  that  no  man  doubts,  yea,  it 
is  known  to  all  ages,  that  holy  and  most  blessed 
Peter,  prince  and  head  of  the  apostles,  the  pil- 
lar of  faith,  and  foundation  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  received  from  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
the  keys  of  the  kingdom  ;  and  that  power  of 
loosing  and  binding  sins  was  given  him  ;  who, 
in  his  successors,  lives  and  exercises  judgment 
to  this  very  time,  and  always."  (e) 


(c)  2  Cor.  ii.  10. 

(d)  1  Cor.  v.  4. 

(e)  Part  2,  Acts  iii. 


52 


VII. PROTESTANT  TRANSLATIONS  AGAINST 


The  Book, 

The  true  English  accord- 

Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 

The last  Translation  of 

Chapter, 

The  Vulgate  Latin  Text. 

ing  to  the  Rhemish 

testant  Bibles,  printed 

the  Protestant  Bible,  Ed. 

and  Verse. 

Translation. 

a.  d.  1562,  1577,  1579. 

Lon.,  an.  1683. 

St.  Matth. 

Ex  te  enim  exiet 

For  out  of   thee 

Instead  of  "  rule," 

Corrected 

chap.  ii. 

dux,     qui     "  regal" 

shall  come  forth  the 

the  NewTestament, 

verse  6 ; 

populum    meum    Is- 

Captain, that  shall 

printed  anno   1580, 

Micah. 

rael.     Jranorvrrfc,  tS 

"  rule"    my  people 

translates    "  feed.  " 

chap.  v. 

elvab  slg   (xgxdvTa  re 

Israel. 

(0 

verse  2. 

'Iffgaijl.  (1) 

1  Peter 

Subjecti       igitur 

Be  subject  there- 

In the  latter  end 

Submit  yourselves 

chap.  ii. 

estote     "  omni     hu- 

fore  "  to  every  hu- 

of king  Henry  VIII. 

"to  every  ordinance 

verse  13. 

mancs         creatura" 

man    creature"    for 

and  in  Edward  VI. 

of    man,"    for    the 

n&or)           dcvd(ih)7Tlvr} 

God,  whether  it  be 

times,  they  transla- 

Lord's sake,whether 

xitoei,propter  Deum, 

to    the    "  king,    as 

ted,  "  submit   your- 

it be  to  the  "  king, 

sive  "regi  quasi  praz- 

excelling,"  &c. 

selves  unto  all  man- 

as supreme. 

cellenti"  sive    duci- 

ner  of  ordinance  of 

bus,  <fyc,  fiagdEl  <W 

man,"  whether  it  be 

insqixovri.  (2) 

; 

unto  the  "  king,  as 
to  the   chief  head." 
IntheBibleof  1577, 
to  the  "king,  as  hav- 
ing pre-eminence." 
In  the  Bible  of  1579, 
to  the  "  king,  as  the 
superior."  (2) 

Acts  of 

Attendite  vobis  et 

Take     heed     to 

—  Wherein    the 

—  Wherein    the 

the  Apos. 

universo     gregi,    in 

yourselves,    and   to 

Holy    Ghost    hath 

Holy    Ghost    hath 

chap.  xx. 

quo     vos      Spiritus 

the     whole     flock, 

made    you    "  over- 

made    you    "  over- 

verse 28. 

Sanctus  posuif'epis- 

wherein    the   Holy 

seers,   to   feed   the 

seers,    to   feed  the 

copos   regere    eccle- 

Ghost  hath   placed 

congregation"        of 

church"  of  God. 

sium"  Dei.       "'Enia- 

you     "  bishops     to 

God.  (3) 

xonvg  noi/ndireiv  t»)»' 

rule  the  church"  of 

Ixxhjolccv  to  0ee.(3) 

God. 

• 

EPISCOPAL    AUTHORITY. 


53 


(1)  It  is  certain,  that  this  is  a  false  translation ; 
because  the  prophet's  words  (Mich,  v.,  cited 
by  St.  Matthew)  both  in  Hebrew  and  Greek, 
signify  only  a  Ruler  or  Governor,  and  not  a 
Pastor  or  Feeder.  Therefore,  it  is  either  a 
great  oversight,  which  is  a  small  matter,  com- 
pared to  the  least  corruption  ;  or  else  it  is  done 
on  purpose  ;  which  I  rather  think,  because  they 
do  the  like  in  another  place,  (Acts,  xx.)  as  you 
may  see  below.  And  that  to  suppress  the  signi- 
fication of  ecclesiastical  power  and  government, 
that  concurs  with  feeding,  first  in  Christ,  and 
from  him  in  his  apostles  and  pastors  of  the 
church ;  both  which  are  here  signified  in  this 
one  Greek  word,  noijualvco ;  to  wit,  that  Christ 
ou"  Saviour  shall  rule  and  feed,  (a)  yea,  he 
shall  rule  with  a  rod  of  iron ;  and  from  him,  St. 
Peter,  and  the  rest,  by  his  commission  given  in 
the  same  word,  noiuaive,  feed  and  rule  my 
sheep ;  yea,  and  that  with  a  rod  of  iron  :  as  when 
he  struck  Ananias  and  -Sapphira  with  corporal 
death ;  as  his  successors  do  the  like  offenders  with 
spiritual  destruction,  (unless  they  repent)  by  the 
terrible  rod  of  excommunication.  This  is  import- 
ed in  the  double  signification  of  the  Greek  word, 
which  they,  to  diminish  ecclesiastical  authority, 
rather  translate  "feed,"  than  "  rule  or  govern." 

(2)  For  the  diminution  of  this  ecclesiastical 
authority,  they  translated  this  text  of  scripture, 
in  King  Henry  VIII.  and  King  Edward  VI. 
times,  "  Unto  the  king,  as  the  chief  head," 
(I  Pet.  ii.)  because  then  the  king  had  first  taken 
upon  him  this  title  of  "  Supreme  head  of  the 
Church."  And  therefore,  they  flattered  both 
him  and  his  young  son,  till  their  heresy  was 
planted  ;  making  the  holy  scripture  say,  that 
the  king  was  the  "  chief  head,"  which  is  all  the 
same  with  supreme  head.  But,  in  Queen  Eliza- 
beth's time,  being,  it  seems,  better  advised  in 
that  point,  (by  Calvin,  I  suppose,  and  the  Ma<j- 
deburgenses,  who  jointly  inveighed  against  that 
title  ;  (b)  and  Calvin,  against  that  by  name,  which 
was  given  to  Henry  VIII.,)  and  because,  perhaps, 
they  thought  they  could  be  bolder  with  a  queen 
than  a  king  ;  as  also,  because  then  they  thought 
their  Reformation  pretty  well  established;  they  be- 
gan to  suppress  this  title  in  their  translations,  and 
to  say,  "  To  the  king,  as  having  pre-eminence," 
and,  "  To  the  king,  as  the  superior  ;"  endeavour- 
ing, as  may  be  supposed  by  this  translation,  to 
encroach  upon  that  ecclesiastical  and  spiritual  ju- 
risdiction they  had  formerly  granted  to  the  Crown. 

But  however  that  be,  let  them  either  justify 
their  translation,  or  confess  their  fault  ;  and  for 
the  rest,  I  will  refer  them  to  the  words  of  St. 
Ignatius,  who  lived  in  the  apostles'  time,  and 
tells  us,  "  That  we  must  first  honour  God,  then 
the  bishop,  then  the  king  ;  because  in  all  things, 
nothing  is  comparable  to  God ;  and  in  the 
church,  nothing  greater  than  the  bishop,  who  is 
consecrated  to  God,  for  the  salvation  of  the 
world ;  and  among  magistrates  and  temporal 
rulers,  none  is  like  the  king."  (c) 

(a)  Psalm  ii.  ;  Apocalyp.  ii.  27  ;  Job.  xxi. 

(b)  Calvin  in  cap.  \ii.  Amos  :  Magdebur.  in  Prat". 
Cent.  7,  fol.  9,  10,  11. 

(c)  Ep.  7,  ad.  Smvrnenses 

8 


(3)  Again,  observe  how  they  here  suppress 
the  word  "  bishop,"  and  translate  it  "  overseers  ;" 
which  is  a  word,  that  has  as  much  relation  to  a 
temporal  magistrate,  as  to  a  bishop.  And  this 
they  do,  because  in  King  Edward  VI.  and  Queen 
Elizabeth's  time,  they  had  no  episcopal  conse- 
cration, but  were  made  only  by  their  letters 
patent ;  (d)  which,  I  suppose,  they  will  not  deny 
However,  when  they  read  of  King  Edward  VI. 
making  John  a  Lasco  (a  Polonian)  overseer  or 
superintendent,  by  his  letters  patent  ;  and  of 
their  making  each  other  superintendents  or  pas- 
tors at  Frankfort,  by  election ;  and  such  only 
to  continue  for  a  time,  or  so  long  as  themselves 
or  the  congregation  pleased,  and  then  to  return 
again  to  the  state  of  private  persons  or  laymen  ; 
(vid.  Hist,  of  the  Troubles  at  Frankfort ;)  (e) 
and  also  of  King  Edward's  giving  power  and  au- 
thority to  Cranmer  :  and  how  Cranmer,  when 
he  made  priests  by  election  only,  I  suppose,  be- 
cause they  were  to  continue  no  longer  thai)  the 
king  pleased,  whereas  priests  truly  consecreated 
are  marked  with  an  indelible  character, — pre- 
tended to  no  other  authority  for  such  act,  but 
only  what  he  received  from  the  king,  by  virtue  of 
his  letters  patent.  Fox,  torn.  2,  an.  1546, 
1547. 

And  we  have  reason  to  judge,  that  Matthew 
Parker,  and  the  rest  of  Queen  Elizabeth's  new 
bishops,  were  no  otherwise  iv  de;  than  by  the 
queen's  letters  patent ;  seeing  that  the  form 
devised  by  King  Edward  VI.  being  repealed  by 
Queen  Mary,  was  not  again  revived  till  the  8th 
of  Queen  Elizabeth.  To  say  nothing  of  the 
invalidity  of  the  said  form,  as  having  neither 
the  name  of  bishop  nor  priest  in  it,  the  like  doubt 
of  their  consecration  arises  from  the  many  and 
gTeat  objections  made  by  Catholic  writers  (f) 
against  their  pretended  Lambeth  Records  and 
Register;  as  also  from  the  consecrators  of  M. 
Parker,  viz.,  Barlow,  Scorey,  &c,  whom  we 
cannot  believe  to  have  been  consecrated  them- 
selves, unless  they  can  first  show  us  records  of 
Barlow's  consecration ;  and  secondly,  tell  us, 
by  what  form  of  consecration  Coverdale  and 
Scorey  were  made  bishops  ;  the  Rom.  Cath.  ordi- 
nal having  been  abrogated,  and  the  new  one  not 
yet  devised,  at  the  time  that  Mason  says  they  were 
consecrated,  which  was  Aug.  30,  1551.  And  as 
for  the  suffragan,  there  is  such  a  difference  about 
his  name,  (g)  some  calling  him  John,  some  Rich- 
ard ;  and  about  the  place  where  he  lived,  some 
calling  him  suffragan  of  Bedford,  (A)  some  of 
Dover,  (i)  that  it  is  doubtful  whether  there  was 
such  a  person  present  at  that  Lambeth  cerenn-ny. 
But  these  things  being  fitter  for  another  treatise, 
which,  I  hope,  you  will  be  presented  with  ere 
long,  I  shall  say  no  more  of  them  in  this  place. 

(d)  K.  Edw.  VI.  Let.  Pat.  Jo.Utenti.  p.  71;Regist.  Ec- 
cles.  peregr.  Londin.  Calvin,  p.  327,  Resp.  ad  Pcrsecul. 
Angl. 

(e)  Hist.  Fra.  p.  51,  GO,  62,  63,  72,  73,  H,  87,  97,  99, 
125,  126,  &c. 

(  f)  Fitzherb.  Dr.    Champ.    Nullity   of  the   English 
Clergy  Prot.  demonst.  &c. 
(s)  See  Dr.  Brainhall,  p.  98. 
(k)  Mason,  Bramhall,  &c. 
(>')  Dr.  Butler  Epist.  de  Consecrat.  Minist. 


54 


VIII. PROTESTANT    TRANSLATIONS    AGAINST 


The  Book, 

The  true  English  accord- 

Corruptions in  the  Pro- 

The last  Translation  of 

Chapter, 

The  Vulgate  Latin  Text. 

ing  to  the  Rhernish 

testant  Bibles,  printed 

the  Protestant  Bible,  Ed. 

and  Verse. 

Translation. 

A.  n.  1562,  1577,  1579. 

Lon.,  an.  1683. 

1  Corinth. 

Numquid  non  ha- 

Have     not      we 

Have      not     we 

Instead   of   "  wo- 

chap. ix. 

bemus       potestatem 

power  to  lead  about 

power  to  lead  about 

man,"    they    trans- 

verse 5. 

"  mulierem,"      soro- 

a  "woman,"  a  sis- 

a "  wife,"  a  sister  1 

late    "  wife,"    here 

remfideXyty  yvvalxa, 

ter?  &c. 

&c.  (1) 

also. 

circumducendi  1  fyc. 

(1) 

Philipp. 

Etiam  rogo  et  te 

Yea,   and   I   be- 

For   companion, 

— "  Yoke-fellow." 

chap.  iv. 

germane  "  compar" 

seech  thee,  my  sin- 

they   say,    "  yoke- 

verse 3. 

avt,vys  yv^aiB.  (2) 

cere  "  companion." 

fellow."  (2) 

Hebrews 

"  Honorabile  con- 

"  Marriage   hon- 

"Wedlock is  hon- 

" Marriage  is  hon- 

chap. xiii. 

nubium  in  omnibus" 

ourable  in  all,"  and 

ourable    among    all 

ourable  in  all." 

verse  4. 

rlfiiog  6  yd/nog  iv  nqoi, 
et  thorns  immacula- 
tus.  (3) 

the  bed  undefiled. 

men,"  &c.  (3) 

St.  Matth. 

Qui     dixit    Mis, 

Who  said  to  them, 

—  "  All  men  can- 

—"  All  men  can- 

chap. xix. 

"  Non   omnes   capi- 

"Not  all  take  this 

not  receive  this  say- 

not receive  this  say- 

verse 11. 

unt"   verbum  istud, 
j*  n&vtsg  ^w^Sfft,  sed 
quibus  datum  est.{4) 

word,"  but  they  to 
whom  it  is  given. 

ing,"  &c.  (4) 

ing,"  &c.     , 

St.  Matth. 

Et  sunt  "enunchi," 

And    there     are 

There  are  some 

Corrected. 

chap.  xix. 

qui  seipsos  cast  rave- 

"  eunuchs,"       who 

"  chaste,"       which 

verse  12. 

runt,  ivvu%oi  oiTiveg, 

have    made    them- 

have    made    them- 

ivv&/ioav   eav  Toig, 

selves     "  eunuchs" 

selves  "  chaste"  for 

propter  regnum  coz- 

for  the  kingdom  of 

the  kingdom  of  hea- 

lorum. (5) 

heaven. 

ven.  (5) 

THE    SINGLE    LIVES    OF    PRIESTS. 


55 


(1)  "  If,"  says  St.  Hierom,  "  none  of  the 
laity,  or  of  the  faithful,  can  pray,  unless  he  for- 
bear conjugal  duty,  priests,  to  whom  it  belongs 
to  offer  sacrifices  for  the  people,  are  always  to 
pray  ;  if  to  pray  always,  therefore  perpetually  to 
live  single  or  unmarried."  (a)  Er,t  our  late  pre- 
tended reformers,  the  more  to  profane  the  sacred 
order  of  priesthood,  to  which  continency  and 
single  life  have  always  been  annexed  in  the  New 
Testament,  and  to  make  it  merely  laical  and 
popular,  will  have  all  to  be  married  men  :  yea, 
those  that  have  vowed  to  the  contrary  :  and  it  is 
a  great  credit  among  them,  for  apostate  priests 
to  take  wives.  And  therefore,  by  their  falsely 
corrupting  this  text  of  St.  Paul,  they  will  needs 
have  him  to  say,  that  he,  and  the  rest  of  the  apos- 
tles, "  led  their  wives  about  with  them,"  (as  King 
Edward  the  Sixth's  German  apostles  did  theirs, 
when  they  came  first  into  England,  at  the  call  of 
the  Lord-protector  Seymour  ;)  whereas  the 
apostle  says  nothing  else,  but  a  woman,  a  sis- 
ter ;  meaning  such  a  Christian  woman  as  fol- 
lowed Christ  and  the  apostles,  to  find  and  main- 
tain them  with  their  substance.  So  does  St. 
Hierom  interpret  it,  (£)  and  St.  Augustine  also, 
both  directly  proving,  that  it  cannot  be  translated 
"  wife."  (2)  Neither  ought  this  text  to  be  trans- 
lated "  yoke-fellow,"  as  our  innovators  do,  on 
purpose  to  make  it  sound  in  English,  "  man  and 
wife  ;"  indeed,  Calvin  and  Beza  translate  it  in 
the  masculine  gender,  for  a  "  companion."  And 
St.  Theophylact,  a  Greek  father,  saith,  that  "  if 
St.  Paul  had  spoken  of  a  woman,  it  should  have 
been  yvrjsia,  in  Greek."  St.  Paul  says  himself, 
he  had  no  wife,  (1  Cor.  vii.)  and  I  think  we 
have  a  little  more  reason  to  believe  him,  than 
those  who  would  gladly  have  him  married  on 
purpose  to  cloak  the  sensuality  of  a  few  fallen 
priests.  In  the  first  chapter  of  the  Acts,  ver. 
14,  Beza  translates,  cum  exoribus,  "  with  their 
wives,"  because  he  would  have  all  the  apostles 
there  esteemed  as  married  men  ;  whereas  the 
words  our  cum  mulicribus,  "  with  the  women,"  as 
our  English  translations  also  have  it ;  because, 
in  this  place,  they  were  ashamed  to  follow  their 
master  Beza. 


(3)  Again,  for  the  marriage  of  priests,  and 
all  sorts  of  men  indifferently,  they  corrupt  this 
text,  making  two  falsifications  in  one  verse  :  the 
one  is,  "  among  all  men  :"  the  other,  that  they 
make  it  an  affirmative  speech,  by  adding  "  is  ;" 
whereas  the  apostle's  words  are  these :  "  Mar- 
riage honourable  in  all,  and  the  bed  undefiled  ;" 
which  is  rather  an  exhortation  ;  as  if  he  should 
say,  "  let  marriage  be  honourable  in  all,  and  the 
bed  undefiled  ;"  as  appears,  both  by  that  which 
goes  before,  and  that  which  follows  immediate- 
ly ;  all  which  are  exhortations.     Let,  therefore, 


(a)  St.  Hierom.,  lib.  coatr.  Jovin.,  cap.  19  ;  1  Cor. 
vii.  5,  35. 

(b)  Lib.  1,  adversus  Jovin.,  de  Op.Mon.,  cap.  4  ;  Lib. 
2,  eap.  24. 


Protestants  give  us  a  reason  out  of  the  Greek 
text,  why  they  translate  the  words  following,  by 
way  of  exhortation,  "  Let  your  conversation  be 
without  covetousness  ;"  and  not  these  words  also 
in  like  manner,  "  Let  marriage  be  honourable  in 
all."  The  phraseology  and  construction  of  both 
are  similar  in  the  Greek. 


(4)  Moreover,  it  is  against  the  profession  of 
continency  in  priests  and  others,  that  they  trans- 
late our  Saviour's  words  respecting  a  "  single 
life,"  and  the  unmarried  state,  thus, "  all  men  can- 
not," &c,  as  though  it  were  impossible  to  live 
continent,  where  Christ  said  not,  "  that  all  men 
cannot,"  but  "  all  men  do  not  receive  this  say- 
ing." St.  Augustine  says,  "  Whosoever  have 
not  this  gift  of  chastity  given  them,  it  is  either 
because  they  will  not  have  it,  or  because  they 
fulfil  not  that  which  they  will :  and  they  that 
have  this  word,  have  it  of  God,  and  their  own 
free  will."  (c)  "  This  gift,"  says  Origen,  "  is 
given  to  all  that  ask  for  it."  (d) 


(5)  Nor  do  they  translate  this  text  exactly, 
nor,  perhaps,  with  a  sincere  meaning ;  for,  if 
there  be  chastity  in  marriage,  as  well  as  in  the 
single  life,  as  Paphnutius  the  confessor  most 
truly  said,  and  as  themselves  are  wont  often  to 
allege,  then  their  translation  doth  by  no  means 
express  our  Saviour's  meaning,  when  they  say, 
"  there  are  some  chaste,  who  have  made  them- 
selves chaste,"  &c,  for  a  man  might  say  all  do 
so,  who  live  chastely  in  matrimony.  But  our 
Saviour  speaks  of  such  as  have  made  themselves 
eunuchs  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven ;  not  by 
cutting  off  those  parts  which  belong  to  gene- 
ration, for  that  would  be  an  horrible  and  mortal 
sin ;  but  by  making  themselves  unable  and 
impotent  for  generation,  by  promise,  and  vow 
of  perpetual  chastity,  which  is  a  spiritual  castra- 
tion of  themselves. 


St.  Basil  calls  the  marriage  of  the  clergy 
"  fornication,"  and  not  "  matrimony."  "  Of 
canonical  persons,"  says  he,  "  the  fornication 
must  not  be  reputed  matrimony,  because  the 
conjunction  of  these  is  altogether  prohibited ; 
for  this  is  altogether  profitable  for  the  security 
of  the  church."  And  in  his  epistle  to  a  certain 
prelate,  he  cites  these  words  from  the  Council 
of  Nice  ;  "  It  is  by  the  great  council  f;  rbidden, 
in  all  cases  whatsoever,  that  it  should  be  lawful 
for  a  bishop,  priest,  or  deacon,  or  for  any  whom- 
soever, that  are  in  orders,  to  have  a  worr.rm  live 
with  them  ;  except  only  their  mother,  sis!  r,  or 
aunt,  or  such  persons  as  are  void  of  all  suspi- 
cion."(c) 


(c)  Lib.  de  Gratia  et  Liber.  Arbitr.,  cap.  4. 
(tf)  Tract  7,  in  Matth. 

(e)  St.  Basil,  Ep.  1,  ad  Amphiioch. ;  Ep.  17,  ad  Pare- 
gor.  Presbyt.  Con.  Nice,  in  Cod.  Grae.  Can.  6. 


56 


IX. PROTESTANT    TRANSLATIONS    AGAINST 


The  Book, 

Chapter, 

and  Verse. 


Acts  of 
the  Apos. 
chap.  xix. 
verse  3. 


Titus 
chap.  iii. 
verses  5, 6. 


The  Vulgate  Latin  Text. 


"  In  quo,  *H  il, 
ergo  baptizati  estis? 
qu>  dixerunt,  "  In" 
Johannis  baptismate. 
(1) 


Non  ex  operibus 
justitiee,  qua  fecimus 
nos,  sed  secundum 
suam  rnisericordiam 
salvos  nos  fecit ;  per 
lavacrum  regenera- 
lionis  et  renovation- 
is  Spiritus  Sancti, 
"quern  effudit"  in  nos 
abunde  per  Jesum 
Christum  Salvato- 
rem  nostrum.  (2) 


The  true  English  accord- 
ing to  the  Rhemish 
Translation. 


"  In"  what  then 
were  you  baptized  1 
who  said,  "  In" 
John's  baptism. 


Not  by  the  works 
of  justice,  which  we 
did  ;  but  according 
to  his  mercy,  he 
hath  sayed  us ;  by 
the  laver  of  regene- 
ration, and  renova- 
tion of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  "  whom  he 
hath  poured"  upon 
us  abundantly,  by 
Jesus  Christ  our 
Saviour. 


Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 
testant Bibles,  printed 
A.  D.  1562,  1577,  1579. 


"  Unto  "  what 
then  were  you  bap- 
tized 1  "And  they" 
said,  "  Unto"  John's 
baptism.  (1) 


—  By  the  "  foun- 
tain" of  the  regene- 
ration of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  "  which  he 
shed  on"  us,  &c.(2) 


The  last  Translation  of 

the  Protestant  Bible,  Ed. 

Lon.,  an.  1683. 


"  Unto"  what  then 
were  ye  baptized  ? 
And  they  said,  "Un- 
to" John's  baptism. 


Not  by  works  of 
righteousness,  which 
we  have  done  ;  but 
according  to  his 
mercy,  he  saved  us ; 
by  the  "  washing"  of 
regeneration,and  re- 
newing of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  "  which  he 
shed"  on  us,  &c. 


THE  SACPAMENT  OF  BAPTISM. 


57 


In  the  beginning  of  the  reformation,  the_.  not 
only  took  away  five  of  the  se^en  sacraments, 
but  also  deprived  the  rest  of  all  grace,  virtue, 
and  efficacy  ;  making  them  no  more  than  poor 
and  beggarly  elements  ;  at  the  most,  no  better 
than  those  of  the  Jewish  law.  And  this,  be- 
cause they  would  not  have  them  bv  any  means 
helpful,  or  necessary  towards  our  salvation  ;  for 
the  obtaining  of  which,  they  held  and  asserted, 
that  "  faith  alone  was  sufficient."  (a) 


For  which  reason  Beza  was  not  content  to 
say,  with  the  apostle,  (Rom.  iv.  11,)  "That 
circumcision  was  a  seal  of  the  justice  of  faith  ;" 
but  because  he  thought  that  term  too  low  for 
the  dignity  of  circumcision,  he  (to  use  his  own 
words)  "  gladly  avoids  it ;"  putting  the  verb 
instead  of  the  noun,  quod  obsignaret,  for  sigil- 
lum.  And  in  his  annotations  upon  the  same 
place,  he  declares  the  reason  of  his  so  doing  to 
be,  the  dignity  of  circumcision  equal  with  any 
sacrament  in  the  N?w  Testament.  His  words 
are,  "  What  could  be  more  magnificently  spoken 
of  any  sacrament  1  Therefore,  they  that  make 
a  real  difference  between  the  sacraments  of  the 
Old  Testament  and  ours,  never  seem  to  have 
known  how  far  Christ's  office  extendeth  :"  which 
he  says,  not  to  magnify  the  old,  but  to  disgrace 
the  new. 


(1)  This  is  also  the  cause, why  the  firstEnglish 
Protestant  translators  corrupted  this  place  in 
the  Acts,  to  make  no  difi'erence  between  John's 
baptism  and  Christ's,  saying  :  "  Unto  what  then 
were  you  baptized  ?  And  they  said,  Unto  John's 
baptism."  Which  Beza  would  have  to  be  spoken 
of  John's  doctrine,  and  not  of  his  baptism  in 
water  ;  as  if  it  had  been  said,  "  What  doctrine 
do  ye  profess  ?"  and  they  said,  "  Johns  ;" 
whereas,  indeed,  the  question  is,  "  In  what 
then  ?"  or  "  wherein  were  you  baptized  ?"  and 
they  said,  "  In  John's  baptism  ;"  as  if  they  would 
6ay,  we  have  received  John's  baptism,  but  not  the 
Holy  Ghost,  as  yet :  whence  immediately  follows, 
■*  then  they  were  baptized  in  the  name  of 
lesus  :"  and  after  imposition  of  hands,  "  the 
Holy  Ghost  came  upon  them  :"  whence  appears, 
the  insufficiency  of  John's  baptism,  and  the  great 
difference  between  it  and  Christ's.  And  this  so 
much  troubles  the  Bezaites,  that  Beza  himself 
expresses  his  grief  in  these  words  :  "  It  is  not- 
necessary,  that  wheresoever  there  is  mention  of 
John's  baptism,  we  should  think  it  the  very 
ceremony  of  baptism  ;  thereiore  they,  who 
gather  that  John's  baptism  differs  from  Christ's, 
because  these,  a  little  after,  are  said  to  be  bap- 
tized in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,  have  no  sure 
foundation."  See  his  annotations  on  Acts  xix. 
Thus  he  endeavours  to  take  away  the  foundation 

(a)  Twenty.-fifth  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles. 


of  this  Catholic  conclusion,  that  John's  baptism 
differs  from,  and  is  far  inferior  to  Christ's. 

Beza  confesses,  that  the  Greek  els  i*  is  often 
used  for  "  wherein"  or  "  wherewith  :"  as  it  is  in 
the  Vulgate  Latin,  and  Erasmus  ;  but  he,  and 
his  followers,  think  it  signifies  not  so  here  ; 
though  but  the  second  verse  after,  (verse  5,) 
the  very  same  Greek  phrase  els  *6  ovofxa  is  by 
them  translated  "  In  ;"  where  they  say,  "  that 
they  were  baptized  in,"  not  unto,  the  name  of 
Jesus  Christ. 


(2)  But  no  wonder,  if  they  disgraced  the 
baptism  of  Christ,  when  some  (b)  of  them  durst 
presume  to  take  it  away,  by  interpreting  these 
words  of  the  Gospel  :  "  Unless  a  man  be  born 
again  uf  water,  and  the  Spirit,"  &c,  in  this 
manner,  "  Unless  a  man  be  born  again  of  water, 
that  is,  the  Spirit ;"  as  if  by  water,  in  this  place, 
were  only  meant  the  Spirit  allegorically,  and  not 
material  water  :  as  though  our  Saviour  had  said 
to  Nicodemus  :  "  Unless  a  man  be  born  again  of 
water,  I  mean  of  the  Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into 
the  kingdom  of  heaven."  To  which  purpose, 
Calvin  as  falsely  translates  the  apostle's  words 
to  Titus  (c)  thus  :  Per  lavacrum  regenerationis 
Spiritus  Sfincti,  quod  effudit  in  nos  abunde ; 
making  the  apostle  say :  "  That  God  poured  the 
water  of  regeneration  upon  us  abundantly  ;"  that 
is,  "  the  Holy  Ghost :"  and  lest  we  should  not 
understand  him,  he  tells  us,  in  his  commentary 
on  this  place,  "  that  the  apostle,  speaking  of 
water  poured  out  abundantly,  speaks  not  of  ma- 
terial water,  but  of  the  Holy  Ghost :"  whereas 
the  apostle  makes  not  "  water"  and  the  "  Holy 
Ghost"  all  one ;  but  most  plainly  distinguishes 
them  ;  not  saying,  that  "  water"  was  poured  out 
upon  us,  as  they  would  infer,  by  translating  it 
"  which  he  shed  ;"  but  the  "  Holy  Ghost,  whom 
he  hath  poured  out  upon  us  abundantly."  So 
that  here  is  meant  both  the  material  water,  or 
washing  of  baptism,  and  the  effect  thereof,  which 
is,  the  Holy  Ghost  poured  out  upon  us. 


But,  if  I  blame  our  English  translators,  in 
this  place,  for  making  it  indifferent,  either 
"  which  fountain,"  or  "which  Holy  Ghost  he 
shed,"  &c,  they  will  tell  me,  that  the  Greek  is 
also  indifferent  :  but,  if  we  demand  of  them, 
whether  the  Holy  Ghost,  or  rather  a  fountain  of 
water,  may  be  said  lo  be  shed,  they  must  doubt- 
less confess,  not  the  Holy  Ghost,  but  water : 
and  consequently,  their  translating  "  which  he 
shed,"  instead  of  "  whom  he  poured  out,"  would 
have  it  denote  the  "  fountain  of  water  ;"  thereby 
agreeing  with  Calvin's  translation,  and  Beza's 
commentary  ;  for  Beza,  in  his  translation,  refers 
it  to  the  Holy  Ghost,  as  Catholics  do. 


(A)  Beza  in  Jo.  iv.  10,  and  in  Tit.  iii.  5. 
(c)  Calvin's  Translation  in  Tit.  iii.  b. 


58 


X. PROTESTANT  TRANSLATIONS  AGAINST 


The  Book, 

Chapter, 

and  Verse. 


St.  James 
chap.  v. 
verse  16. 


St.  Matth. 
chap.  xi. 
verse  21  ; 
St.  Luke 
chap.  x. 
verse  13. 


St.  Matth. 
chap.  iii. 
verse  2. 


St.  Luke 
chap.  iii. 
verse  3. 


St.  Luke 
chap.  iii. 
verse  8. 


Acts  of 
the  Apos. 
chap.  ii. 
verse  38. 


The  Vulgate  Latin  Text. 


"  Confitemini,  " 
k^ofioXoyeiodp,  ergo, 
alter  utrum  "  pec- 
cata"  vestra.  (1) 


—  Si  in  Tyro  et 
Sidone  facta  essent 
virtutes,  qua  facta 
stent  in  vobis,  olim  in 
cilicio  et  cinere  "  pce- 
nitentiam  egissent" 

(IBTBVOTjOaV,  (2) 


u  Pcenitentiam  agite," 
appropinquabit  enim 
regnum  cozlorum. 


Predicans  baptis- 
mum  "  poznitentia." 


Facite  ergo  fructus 
dignos  "patnitentia" 


Petrus  vero  ad 
illos  "  pcenitentiam 
{inquit)  agite,"  et 
baptizetur  unusquis- 
que  vestrum  in  no- 
mine  Jesu  Christi. 


The  true  English  accord- 
ing to  the  Rhemish 
Translation. 


"  Confess,"  there- 
fore,your  "sins"  one 
to  another. 


—  If  in  Tyre  and 
Sidon  had  been 
wrought  the  mira- 
cles that  have  been 
done  in  you,  "  they 
had  done  penance" 
in  sackcloth  and 
ashes,  long  ere  now. 


"  Do  penance,"  for 
tne  kingdom  of  hea- 
ven is  at  hand. 


—  Preaching  the 
baptism     of     "  pe- 


Yield,  therefore, 
fruits  worthy  of 
"  penance." 


Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 
testant Bibles,  printed 
a.  d.  1562,  1577,  1579. 


But  Peter  said  to 
them,  "do  penance," 
and  be  every  one  of 
you  baptized  in  the 
name  of  JesusChrist. 


"  Acknowledge  " 
your  "  faults  "  one 
to  another.  (1) 


Beza  in  all  his 
translations  has, 
"  they  had  amended 
their  lives."  And 
our  other  transla- 
tions say,  "  they 
would  have  repen- 
ted." (2) 


"  Repent,"  for  the 
kingdom  of  heaven 
is  at  hand. 


The  last  Translation   of 

the  Protestant  Bible,  Ed. 

Lon.,  an.  1683. 


Preaching  the  bap- 
tism of  "  repen- 
tance." 


—  Worthy  of  "re- 
pentance." Beza 
says,  "  Do  fruits 
meet  for  them  that 
amend  their  lives." 


— "  Repent,"  and 
be  every  one  of  you 
baptized,  &c. 


"  Confess  "  your 
faults,"  &c. 


Instead  of  "  they 
had  done  penance," 
they  say,  "  they 
would  have  repen- 
ted." 


"  Repent,"  &c. 


—  Preaching  the 
baptism  of  "  repen- 
tance." 


—  Fruit  worthy  of 
repentance." 


— "  Repent,"  and 
be  baptized,  &c. 


CONFESSION   AND    THE    SACRAMENT   OF    PENANCE. 


59 


( 1 )  To  avoid  this  term  "  confession"  especially 
in  this  place,  whence  the  reader  might  easily 
gather  **  sacramental  confession,"  they  thus  fal- 
sify the  text.  It  is  said  a  little  before,  "  if  any 
be  sick,  let  him  bring  in  the  priests,"  &c.  And 
then  it  follows,  "  confess  your  sins,"  &c.  But 
they,  to  make  sure  work,  say,  acknowledge, 
instead  of  confess  ;  and  for  priests,  "  elders," 
tnd  for  sins,  they  had  rather  say  faults  ;  "  ac- 
knowledge your  faults,"  to  make  it  sound  among 
the  ignorant  common  people,  as  different  as  they 
can  from  the  usual  Catholic  phrase,  "  Confess 
your  sins."  "W  hat  mean  they  by  this  ?"  If  this 
acknowledging  of  faults  one  to  another,  before 
death,  be  indifferently  made  to  all  men,  why  do 
they  appoint  in  their  common  prayer-book,  (o) 
(as  it  seems,  out  of  this  place,)  that  the  sick 
person  shall  make  a  special  confession  to  the 
minister  ;  and  he  shall  absolve  him  in  the  very 
same  form  of  absolution  that  Catholic  priests 
use  in  the  sacrament  of  penance  1  And  again, 
seeing  themselves  acknowledge  forgiveness  of 
sins  by  the  minister,  why  do  tiiey  not  reckon 
penance,  of  which  confession  is  a  part,  amongst 
the  sacraments  1  But,  I  suppose,  when  they 
translated  their  Bibles,  they  were  of  the  same 
judgment  with  the  ministers  of  the  diocess  of 
Lincoln,  (b)  who  petitioned  to  have  the  words 
of  absolution  blotted  out  of  the  common  prayer- 
book  ;  but  when  they  visit  the  sick,  they  are  of 
the  judgment  of  Roman  Catholics,  who,  at  this 
day,  hold  confession  and  absolution  necessary  to 
salvation,  as  did  also  the  primitive  Christians. 
Witness  St.  Basil  :  "  Sins  must  necessarily  be 
opened  unto  those,  to  whom  the  dispensations 
of  God's  mysteries  is  committed."  St.  Am- 
brose :  "  If  thou  desirest  to  be  justified,  confess 
thy  sin  :  for  a  sincere  confession  of  sins  dissolves 
the  knot  of  iniquity."  (c) 


(2)  As  for  penance,  and  satisfaction  for  sins, 
they  utterly  deny  it,  upon  the  heresy  of,  "  only 
faith  justifying  and  saving  a  man."  Beza  pro- 
tests, that  he  avoids  these  terms,  [teiavoia, 
pwnitentia,  and  fieiaroeijs,  pcenitentiam  agile, 
of  purpose  :  and  says,  that  in  translating  these 
Greek  words,  he  will  always  use,  resipiscentia 
and  resipiscite,  "  amendment  of  life,"  and  "  amend 
your  lives."  And  our  English  Bibles,  to  this 
day,  dare  not  venture  on  the  word  penance, 
but  only  repentance  ;  which  is  not  only  far 
different  from  the  Greek  word,  but  even  from 
the  very  circumstance  of  the  text  ;  as  is  evi- 
dent from  those  words  of  St.  Matth.  xi.,  and 
Luke  x.,  were  these  words,  "  sackcloth  and 
ashes,"  cannot  but  signify  more  than-  the  word 
repentance,  or  amendment  of  life  can  denote ; 
as  is  plain  from  these  words  of  St  Basil,  (d) 


(a)  Visitation  of  the  Sick. 

(b)  Survey  of  the  Common  Prayer-Book. 

(c)  St.  Basil,  in  Regulis  Brevior.,  Interrogation e  288. 
St.  Amb.,  lib.  de  Poenit.,  cap.  6. 

(d)  St.  Basil  in  Psalm  xxix  ;  St.  Aug.  Horn.  27-  Inter- 
50  H.  et  Ep.  108;  Sozom.,  Lib.  7,  cap.  16.  See  St. 
Hierom.  in  Epitaph.  Fabiol. 


"  Sackcloth  makes  for  penance  ;  for  the  fathers, 
in  old  time,  sitting  in  sackcloth  and  ashes,  did 
penance."  Do  not  St.  John  Baptist,  and  St. 
Paul,  plainly  signify  penitential  works,  when 
they  exhort  us  to  "  do  fruits  worthy  of  penance  ?" 
which  penance  St.  Augustine  thus  declares  : 
"  There  it  a  more  grievous  and  more  mournful 
penan?e,  whereby  properly  they  are  called  in 
the  church,  that  are  penitents  :  removed  also 
from  partaking  the  sacrament  of  the  altar."  And 
Sozomen,  in  his  ecclesiastical  history,  says,  "  In 
the  Church  of  Rome,  there  is  a  manifest  and 
known  place  for  the  penitents,  and  in  it  they 
stand  sorrowful,  and  as  it  were  mourning,  and 
when  the  sacrifice  is  ended,  being  not  made  par- 
takers thereof,  with  weeping  and  lamentations 
they  cast  themselves  far  on  the  ground :  then 
the  bishop,  weeping  also  with  compassion,  lifts 
them  up  ;  and,  after  a  certain  time  enjoined, 
absolves  them  from  their  penance.  This  the 
priests  or  bishnps  of  Rome  keep,  from  the  very 
beginning,  even  until  our  time." 


Not  only  Sozomen,  but  (c)  Socrates  also,  and 
all  the  ancient  fathers,  when  they  speak  of 
penitents,  that  confessed  and  lamented  their 
sins,  and  were  enjoined  penance,  and  performed 
it,  did  always  express  it  in  the  said  Greek  words  ; 
which,  therefore,  are  proved  most  evidently  to 
signify  penance,  and  doing  penance.  Again, 
when  the  ancient  Council  of  Laodicea  (f)  says, 
that  the  time  of  penance  should  be  given  to 
offenders,  according  to  the  proportion  of  the 
fault :  and  that  such  shall  not  communicate  till 
a  certain  time ;  but  after  they  have  done  pen- 
ance, and  confessed  their  fault,  (g)  are  then  to 
be  received  :  and  when  the  first  Council  of  Nice 
speaks  of  shortening  or  prolonging  the  days  of 
penance  :  when  (h)  St.  Basil  speaks  after  the 
same  manner  ;  when  St.  Chrysustom  calls  the 
sackcloth  and  fasting  of  the  Ninevhos,  for  cer- 
tain days,  "  Tot  dierum  pwnitentiam,  so  many 
days  of  penance  :"  in  all  these  places,  I  would 
demand  of  our  translators  of  the  English  Bible, 
if  all  these  speeches  of  penance,  and  doing 
penance,  are  not  expressed  by  the  said  Greek 
words  ?  and  I  would  ask  them,  whether  in  these 
places,  where  there  is  mentioned  a  proscribed 
time  of  satisfaction  for  sin,  by  such  and  such 
penal  means,  they  will  translate  repentance  and 
amendment  of  life  only  ?  Moreover,  the  Latin 
Church,  and  all  the  ancient  fathers  thereof, 
have  always  read,  as  the  Vulgate  Latin  inter- 
preter translates,  and  do  all  expound  the  same 
penance,  and  doing  penance  :  for  example,  see 
St.  Augustine,  among  others  ;  (t)  where  you 
will  find  it  plain,  that  he  speaks  of  u  penitential 
works,  for  satisfaction  of  sins." 


,c)  Socrat.,  lib.  5,  cap.  19. 

(/)  Council  of  Laodicea,  Can.  2,  9,  et  19. 

(#)  1  Council  cf  Nice,  Can.  12. 

(h)  St.  Basil,  cap.  1,  ad  Amphiloch. 

(i)  St.  August.,  Ep.  108. 


60 


XI. PROTESTANT  TRANSLATIONS  AGAINST 


The  Book, 

The  true  English  accord- 

Corruptions in  the  Pro- 

The last  Translation   of 

Chapter, 
and  Verse. 

The  Vulgate  Latin  Text. 

ing  to  the  Rhemish 

testant  Bibles,  printed 

the  Protestant  Bible,  Ed. 

Translation. 

a.  D.  15G2,  1577,  1579. 

Lon.,  an.  1683. 

St.  Luke 

Ave,        "  giulia 

Hail,     «  full     of 

Hail,  "  ihou  that 

In     Bib.       1637 

chap.  i. 

plena,"   Dominus  te 

grace,"  our  Lord  is 

art  freely  beloved." 

Hail,  "  thou  that  art 

verse  28. 

cum,     xexocoixw/xivTj. 

with  thee. 

In  Bib.  1577,  "thou 

highly  favoured."  In 

(1) 

that  art  in  high  fa- 
vour." (1) 

Bib.     1683,     Hail, 
"  thou  that  art  high- 
ly   favoured,"     our 
Lord  is  with  thee. 

St.  Matth. 

Et  "  vocavit"  no- 

And  "  called"  his 

And  "  he"  called 

And  "  he"  called 

chap.  i. 

nomen   ejus    Jesum, 

name  Jesus. 

his  name  Jesus.  (2) 

his  name  Jesus. 

verse  25. 

xc  exaXsoe  to  ovo/ua 
ccvth  Ij]ohv.  (2) 

Genesis 

"  7psa"     conteret 

"She"  shall  bruise 

"  It"  shall  bruise 

"It"  shall  bruise 

chap.  iii. 

caput     tuum,    et    tu 

thy  head  in  pieces, 

thy  head,  and  thou 

thy  head,  and  thou 

verse  15. 

"  insidiaberis"     cal- 

and  "  thou  shalt  lie 

shalt    "  bruise     his 

shalt    "  bruise    his 

caneo  ejus.  (3) 

in  wait  for  her  heel." 

heel."  (3) 

heel." 

2  St.  Peter 

Da  bo  autem  operant 

And  I  will  do  my 

I  will  endeavour 

I  will  endeavour, 

chap.  i. 

et  frequenter   habere 

endeavour ;    you  to 

that    you    may    be 

that    you    may    be 

verse  15. 

vos  post   obitum  mc- 

have  often  after  my 

able,   after   my  de- 

able   after   my    de- 

um,  ut  "'horum  me- 

decease    also,    that 

cease,  to  have  these 

cease,to  have  "these 

moriarn"  faciatis.{4) 

you    may    keep     a 

things    "  always  in 

things  always  in  re- 

" memory  of   these 

remembrance."  (4) 

membrance." 

things." 

Psalm 

Nimis  honorijicati 

Thy   friends,    0 

How    dear     are 

How  precious  also 

cxxxviii. 

sunt  amici  tut,  ""'"T"1, 

God,    are    become 

thy      counsels     (or 

are  thy  thoughts  un- 

Eng. Bib., 

oi  cpiloi  on,  Deus ;  ni- 

exceedingly honour- 

thoughts)   to     me  ? 

to  me,  0  God!  How 

cxxxix. 

mis  confortalus    est 

able  ;    their  prince- 

0 !  how  great  is  the 

great  is  the  sum  of 

verse  17. 

principatus      eorum, 

arrnDJCl  "jD^3>,  at,  aQxoit, 

aVTOiV.    (5) 

dom  is  exceedingly 
strengthened. 

sum  of  them  ?  (5) 

them ! 

THE    HONOUR.   OF    OUR    BLESSED    LADY    AND    OTHER    SAINTS. 


61 


(1)  The  most  blessed  Virgin,  and  glorious 
mother  of  Christ,  has  by  God's  holy  Church 
always  been  honoured  with  most  magnificent 
titles  and  addresses.  One  of  the  first  four  general . 
councils  gives  her  the  transcendent  title  of  the 
mother  of  God.  (a)  And  by  St.  Cyril  of  Alexan- 
dria, she  is  saluted  in  these  words,  "  Hail  !  holy 
mother  of  God,  rich  treasure  of  the  world,  ever- 
shining  lamp,  crown  of  purity,  and  sceptre  of  true 
doctrine  ;  by  thee  the  holy  Trinity  is  every  where 
blessed  and  adored,  the  heavens  exult,  angels 
rejoice,  and  devils  are  chased  from  us  :  who  so 
surpasses  in  elegance,  as  to  be  able  to  say 
enough  to  the  glory  of  Mary  ?"  Yea,  the  angel 
Gabriel  is  commissioned  from  God  to  address 
himself  to  her  with  this  salutation,  "  Hail  !  full 
of  grace. "(b)  Since  which  time,  what  has  ever 
been  more  common,  and,  at  this  day,  more  gen- 
eral and  useful  in  all  Christian  countries,  than  in 
the  Ave  Maria  to  say,  gratia  plena,  "  full  of 
grace  ?"  But,  in  our  miserable  land,  the  holy 
prayer,  which  every  child  used  to  say,  is  not  only 
banished,  but  the  very  text  of  scripture  wherein 
our  blessed  Lady  was  saluted  by  the  angel, 
"  Hail !  full  of  grace,"  they  have  changed  into 
another  manner  of  salutation,  viz.,  "  Hail !  thou 
that  art  freely  beloved,"  or,  "  in  high  favour." 
(c)  I  would  gladly  know  from  them,  why  this, 
or  that,  or  any  other  thing,  rather  than  "  Hail ! 
full  of  grace  ?"  St.  John  Baptist  was  full  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  even  from  his  birth  ;  St.  Stephen 
was  "  full  of  grace,(d)  why  may  not  then  our  Lady 
be  called  "  full  of  grace,"  who,  as  St.  Ambrose 
says,  "  only  obtained  the  grace  which  no  other 
woman  deserved,  to  be  replenished  with  the  au- 
thor of  grace  ?" 

If  they  say,  the  Greek  word  does  not  signify 
so  :  I  must  ask  them,  why  they  translate  ^Ixom 
fihoa,  (e)  ulcernsus,  "  full  of  sores,"  and  will 
not  translate  xexngnwuivT],  gratiosa,  "  full  of 
grace  V  Let  them  tell  us  what  difference  there  is 
in  the  nature  and  significancy  of  these  two  words. 
If  ulcerosus,  as  Beza  translates  it,  be  "  full  of 
sores,"  why  is  not  gratiosa,  as  Erasmus  trans- 
lates it,  "  full  of  grace  ?"  seeing  that  all  such 
adjectives  in  osus  signify  fulness,  as  periculosus; 
arumnosus,  &c,  as  every  school-boy  knows. 
What  syllable  is  there  in  this  word,  that  seems 
to  make  it  signify  "  freely  beloved?"  St.  Chry- 
sostom,  and  the  Greek  doctors,  who  should  best 
know  the  nature  of  this  Greek  word,  say,  that 
it  signifies  to  make  gracious  and  acceptable. 
St.  Athanasius,  a  Greek  doctor,  says,  that  our 
blessed  Lady  had  this  title,  xexotQircj/jiyj},  be- 
cause the  Holy  Ghost  descended  into  her,  filling 
her  with  all  graces  and  virtues.  And  St.  Hierom 
reads  gratia  plena,  and  says  plainly,  she  was  so 
saluted,  "  full  of  grace,"  because  she  conceived 
him  in  whom  all  fulness  of  the  Deity  dwelt 
corporally.  (/) 

(2)  Again,  to  take  from  the  holy  mother  of 
God,   what  honour   they   can,   they  translate, 

(a)  Cone.  Eph.,  cap.  13.  (£)  St.  Luke  i.  18. 

(c)  St.  Luke  i.  15.     (dy  Acts  vii.  8.     (e)  Luke  xvi.  20. 
(/)  St.  Chys.  Comment,  in  Ep.  1  ;  St.  Athan.  de  S. 
Deipar;  St.  Hierom.  in  Ep.  140  in  Expos.  Psal.  xliv. 
9 


that  "  he  (viz.  Joseph)  called  his  name  Jesus." 
And  why  not  she,  as  well  as  he  1  For  in  St. 
Luke,  the  angel  saith  to  our  Lady  also, 
"  Thou  shalt  call  his  name  Jesus."  Have 
we  not  much  more  reason  to  think  that  the 
blessed  Virgin,  the  natural  mother  of  our 
Saviour,  gave  him  the  name  Jesus,  than  Joseph, 
his  reputed  father  ;  seeing  also  St.  Matthew, 
in  this  place,  limits  it  neither  to  him  nor  her  ? 
And  the  angel  revealed  the'hame  first  unto  her, 
saying,  that  she  should  so  call  him.  And  the 
Hebrew  word,  Isa.  vii.,  whereunto  the  angel 
alludes,  is  the  feminine  gender  ;  and  by  the  great 
Rabbins  referred  unto  her,  saying  expressly, 
in  their  commentaries,  et  vocabit  ipsa  puella, 
&c,  "  and  the  maid  herself  shall  call  his  name 
Jesus."  (g) 

(3)  How  ready  our  new  controllers  of  antiquity 
and  the  approved  ancient  Latin  translation,  are 
to  find  fault  with  this  text,  Gen.  iii.,  "  She  shall 
bruise  thy  head,"  &c, because  it  appertains  to  our 
blessed  Lady's  honour  ;  saying,  that  all  ancient 
fathers  read  ipsum :  (h)  when  on  the  contrary, 
St.  Chrysostom,  St.  Ambrose,  St.  Augustine, 
St.  Gregory,  St.  Bede,  St.  Bernard,  and  many 
others,  read  ipsa,  as  the  Latin  text  now  does. 
And  though  some  have  read  otherwise,  yet, 
whether  we  read  "  she"  shall  bruise,  or  "  her 
seed,"  that  is,  her  Son,  Christ  Jesus,  we  attri- 
bute no  more,  or  no  less  to  Christ,  or  to  his 
mother,  by  this  reading  or  by  that ;  as  you  inay 
see,  if  you  please  to  read  the  annotations  upon 
this  place  in  the  Doway  Bible.  I  have  spoken 
of  this  in  the  preface. 

(4)  Where  the  scripture,  in  the  original,  is 
ambiguous  and  indifferent  to  divers  senses,  it 
ought  not  to  be  restrained  or  limited  by  trans- 
lation, unless  there  be  a  mere  necessity,  when  it 
can  hardly  express  the  ambiguity  of  the  original. 
As  for  example,  in  this  where  St.  Peter  speaks 
so  ambiguously,  either  that  he  will  remember 
them  after  his  death,  or  that  they  shall  remember 
him.  But  the  Calvinists  restrain  the  sense  of 
this  place,  without  any  necessity ;  and  that 
against  the  prayer  and  intercession  of  saints  for 
us,  contrary  to  the  judgment  of  some  of  the 
Greek  fathers ;  who  concluded  from  it,  "  that 
the  saints  in  heaven  remember  us  on  earth,  and 
make  intercession  for  us." 

(5)  In  fine,  this  verse  of  the  Psalms,  (i) 
which  is  by  the  church  and  all  antiquity  read 
thus,  and  both  sung  and  said  in  honour  of  the 
holy  apostles,  agreeably  tothat  in  another  Psalm, 
"  Thou  shalt  appoint  them  princes  over  all  the 
earth,"  they  translate  contrary  both  to  the 
Hebrew  and  the  Greek,  which  is  altogether 
according  to  the  said  ancient  Latin  translation, 
"  How  are  the  heads  of  them  strengthened,  or 
their  princedoms  ?"  And  this  they  do,  pur- 
posely to  detract  from  the  honour  of  the  apos- 
tles and  holy  saints. 

(g)  Rabbi  Abraham  et  Rabbi  David. 
(A)  See  the  Annot.  upon  this  place  in  the  Doway  Bible 
(i)  Oecum.  in  Caten.  Gagneius  in  hunc  locum,  Psa 
xliv 


62 


XII. PROTESTANT    TRANSLATIONS    AGAINST 


The  Book, 

CI  inter, 

and  Vorse. 

The  Vulgate  Latin  Text. 

The  true  English  accord- 
ing to  the  Rhemish 
Translation. 

Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 
testant Bibles,  printed 
A.  D.  1562,  1577,  1579. 

The  last  Translation   of 

the  Protestant  Bible,  Ed. 

Lon.,  an.  1683. 

Hebrews 
chap.  xi. 
verse  21. 

Fide,   Jacob    mo- 
riens,  singulos  filio- 
rum      Joseph     bene 
dixit,   et    "  adoravit 
fastigiu  m          virg  & 
ejus"   nQoasxvvTjcrsv 
ini  to  &xqov  ttj?  qa@dis 
&VT8.   (1) 

By   faith,   Jacob 
dying,  blessed  every 
one  of  the   sons   of 
Joseph,  and  "adored 
the  top  of  his  rod." 

—  And   "  leaning 
on  the   end  of   his 
staff,      worshipped 
God."  (1) 

By  faith  Jacob, 
when  he  was  a-dy- 
ing,  blessed  both  the 
sons  of  Joseph,  "and 
worshipped,  leaning 
upon  the  top  of  his 
staff." 

Genesis 
chap,  xlvii. 
verse  31. 

"  Adoravit  Israel 
Deum,  conversus  ad" 
lectuli  caput. 

"  Israel     adored 
God,  turning  to"  the 
bed's  head. 

"  Israel  worship- 
ped   God  towards" 
the  bed's  head.  (2) 

And  "Israel  bowed 
himself  upon"  the 
bed's  head. 

Ps.  xcviii. 
verse  5. 
Eng.  Bib., 
xcix. 

Eocaltate     Domi- 
num  Deum  nostrum- 
"  et    adorate   scabel, 
lum    pedum     ejus," 
quoniam  sanctum  est. 

Exalt    the    Lord 
our      God,      "  and 
adore  ye   the  foot- 
stool  of  his   feet," 
"because  it"  is  holy. 

Exalt    the    Lord 
our  God,  and  "fall 
down    before"   his 
footstool,  "for  he" 
is  holy. 

Exalt  the  Lord 
our  God,  and  "  wor- 
ship at  his  footstool," 
"  for  he"  is  holy. 

Ps.  cxxxi. 
verse  7. 
Eng.  Bib., 
cxxxii. 

Introibimus       in 
tabernaculum     ejus, 
"  adorabimus  in  loco 
ubi   steterunt  pedes 
ejus." 

We  will  enter  in- 
to   his    tabernacle, 
we  will  "  adore  in 
the  place  where  his 
feet  stood." 

—  We  will  "  fall 
down  before  his  foot- 
stool." 

We  will  go  into 
his  tabernacles,  we 
will  "worship  at  his 
footstool." 

THE    DISTINCTION    OF    RELATIVE    AND    DIVINE    WORSHIP. 


63 


(1)  The  sacred  Council  of  Trent  decrees,  that 
"  the  images  of  Christ,  of  the  virgin  mother  of 
God,  and  of  other  saints,  are  to  be  had  and  re- 
tained, especially  in  churches ;  and  that  due 
honour  and  worship  is  to  be  imparted  unto  them  : 
not  that  any  divinity  is  believed  to  be  in  them ; 
or  virtue,  for  which  they  are  to  be  worshipped  ; 
or  tnat  any  thing  is  to  be  begged  of  them  ;  or 
that  hope  is  to  be  put  in  them  ;  as,  in  times  past, 
the  Pagans  did,  who  put  their  trust  in  idols  ;  but 
because  the  honour  which  is  exhibited  to  them, 
is  referred  to  the  archetype,  which  they  resem- 
ble :  so  that,  by  the  images  which  we  kiss,  and 
before  which  we  uncover  our  heads,  and  kneel, 
we  adore  Christ  and  his  saints,  whose  likeness 
they  bear."  (a)  And  the  second  Council  of 
Nice,  which  confirmed  the  ancient  reverence 
due  to  sacred  images,  tells  us,  "  That  these 
images  the  faithful  salute  with  a  kiss,  and  give 
an  honorary  worship  to  them,  but  not  the  true 
latria,  or  divine  worship,  which  is  according  to 
faith,  and  can  be  given  to  none  but  to  God  him- 
self." (b)  Between  which  degree  of  worship, 
latria  and  Julia,  Protestants  arc  60  loath  to  make 
any  distinction,  that,  in  this  place,  they  restrain 
the  scripture  to  the  sense  of  one  doctor  ;  inso- 
much that  they  make  the  commentary  of  St. 
Augustine,  (peculiar  to  him  alone,)  the  verv  text 
of  scripture,  in  their  translation  ;  thereby  exclu- 
ding all  other  senses  and  expositions  of  other 
fathers ;  who  either  read  and  expound,  that 
"  Jacob  adored  the  top  of  Joseph's  sceptre  ;"  or 
else,  that  "  he  adored  towards  the  top  of  his 
sceptre  :"  besides  which  two  meanings,  there  is 
no  other  interpretation  of  this  place,  in  all  anti- 
quity, but  in  St.  Augustine  only,  as  Beza  him- 
self confesses.  And  here  they  add  two  words 
more  than  are  in  the  Greek  text,  "  Leaning 
an'1  God."  fV>rcing  dirou  to  signify  dviov,  which 
may  be,  but  is  as  rare  as  vtrgas  ejus,  for  virgas 
surp.  ;  and  turning  the  other  words  clear  out  of 
their  order,  place,  and  form  of  construction, 
which  they  must  needs  have  correspondent  and 
answerable  to  the  Hebrew  text,  from  whence 
they  were  translated ;  which  Hebrew  words 
themselves  translate  in  this  order,  "  He  wor- 
shipped towards  the  bed's  head  ;"  and  if  so, 
according  to  the  Hebrew,  then  did  he  worship ' 
"  towards  the  top  of  his  sceptre,"  according 
to  the  Greek  ;  the  difference  of  both  being  onlv 
in  these  words,  sceptre  and  bed ;  because  the 
Hebrew  is  ambiguous  as  to  both,  and  not  in  the 
order  and  construction  of  the  sentence. 


(2)  But  why  is  it,  that  they  thus  boldly  add 
in  one  place,  and  take  away  in  another !  Why 
do  they  add  "  leaned,   and  God"  in  one  text, 


(a)  Concil.  Trident.,  Sess.  25. 
(£)  Concil.  Nicen.,  Act  7. 


and  totally  suppress  "  worshipped  God"  in 
another  ?  Is  it  not  because  they  are  afraid,  lest 
those  expressions  might  warrant  and  confirm 
the  Catholic  and  Christian  manner  of  adoring 
our  Saviour  Christ,  towards  the  holy  cross,  or 
before  his  image,  the  crucifix,  the  altar,  &c.  ? 
And  though  they  make  so  much  of  the  Greek 
particle,  em,  as  to  translate  it,  "  leaning  upon," 
rather  than  "  towards  ;"  yet  the  ancient  Greek 
fathers  (c)  considered  it  of  such  little  import, 
that  they  expounded  and  read  the  text,  as  if  it 
were  for  the  phrase  only,  and  not  for  any  signi- 
fication at  all  ;  saying,  "  Jacob  adored  Joseph's 
sceptre  ;  the  people  of  Israel  adored  the  temple, 
the  ark,  the  holy  mount,  the  place  where  his  feet 
stood,"  and  the  like  :  whereby  St.  Damascene 
proves  the  adoration  of  creatures,  named  dulia  ; 
to  wit,  of  the  cross,  and  of  sacred  images.  If,  I 
say,  these  fathers  make  so  little  force  of  the 
prepositions,  as  to  infer  from  these  texts,  not 
only  adoration  "  towards"  the  thing,  but  ado- 
ration "  of"  the  thing  ;  how  come  these,  our  new 
translators,  thus  to  strain  and  rack  the  little 
particle,  tm,  to  make  it  signify  "  leaning  upon," 
and  utterly  to  exclude  it  from  signifying  any 
thins:  tending  towards  adoration  ? 


I  would  gladly  know  of  them,  whether  in 
these  places  of  the  Psalms  there  be  any  force  in 
the  Hebrew  prepositions  ?  Surely  no  more  than 
if  we  should  say  in  English,  without  preposi- 
tions, "  adore  ye  his  holy  will  :  we  will  adore  the 
place  where  his  feet  stood :  adore  }  e  his  foot- 
stool ;"  for  they  know  the  same  preposition  is 
need  also,  when  it  is  said,  "  adore  ye  our  Lord  ;" 
or,  as  themselves  translate  it,  "  worship  tin', 
Lord  ;"  where  there  can  be  no  force  nor  signi- 
fication of  the  preposition  :  and  therefore,  in 
these  places,  their  translation  is  corrupt  and 
wilful ;  when  they  say,  "  we  will  fall  down  be- 
fore," or,  "  at  his  footstool,"  &c.  Where  they 
shun  and  avoid,  first,  the  term  of  adoration, 
which  the  Hebrew  and  Greek  duly  express,  by 
terms  correspondent  in  both  languages  through- 
out the  Bible,  and  are  applied,  for  the  most 
part,  to  signify  adoring  of  creatures.  Secondly 
they  avoid  the  Greek  phrase,  which  is,  at  least, 
to  adore  "  towards"  these  holy  things  and 
places  :  and  much'  more  the  Hebrew  phrase, 
which  is,  to  adore  the  very  things  rehearsed. 
"  To  adore  God's  footstool,"  (as  the  Psalmist 
saith,)  "  because  it  is  holy,"  or,  "  because  he  is 
holy,"  whose  footstool  it  is,  as  the  Greek  read- 
eth.  And  St.  Augustine  so  precisely  and  reli- 
giously reads,  "  adore  ye  his  footstool,"  that  he 
examines  the  case  ;  and  finds,  thereby,  that  the 
blessed  sacrament  must  be  adored,  and  that  no 
good  Christian  takes  it,  before  he  adores  it. 


(c)  St.  Chrys.  Oecum.  in  Collection.  St.  Damasc.,lib. 
1,  pro  Imaginib.,  Leont.  apud  Damas. 


64 


XIII. PROTESTANT    TRANSLATIONS    AGAINST 


The  Book, 

Chapter, 

and  Verse. 


Coloss. 
cliap.  iii. 
verse  5. 


Ephesians 
chap.  v. 
verse  5. 


2  Corinth, 
chap.  vi. 
verse  16. 


1  Ep.  John 
chap.  v. 
verse  21. 


1  Corinth, 
chap.  x. 
verse  7. 


The  Vulgate  Latin  Text. 


Et  avaritiam,  qucs 
est  "  simulacrorum 
servitus,"  eidwloXur. 
gsia.  (1) 


— Aut  avarus,  quod 
est  "  idolorum  ser- 
vitus." 


Quis  autem 
sensus    templo 


con- 
Dei 
cum  "idolis?"6idwXo)P 


(2) 


Filioli,  custodite 
vos  a  "  simulacris." 
BiditjXcoy. 


The  true  English  accord- 
ing to  the  Rhemish 
Translation. 


—  And  avarice, 
which  is  the  "  ser- 
vice of  idols." 


— Or  covetous  per- 
son, which  is  "  the 
service  of  idols." 


And  what  cgree- 
ment  hath  the  tem- 
ple of  God  with 
"  idols  ?" 


My  little  children, 
keep  yourselves 
from  "  idols." 


Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 
testant Bibles,  printed 
a.  d.  1562,  1577,  1579. 


— And  covetous- 
ness,  which  is  the 
"  worshipping  of 
images."  (1) 


—  Or  covetous 
man,  which  is  "  a 
worshipper  of  im- 
ages." 


The  last  Translation  of 

the  Protestant  Bible,  Ed. 

Lon.,  an.  1683. 


—  And  covetous- 
ness,  which  is  "ido- 
latry.' 


Corrected. 


How  agreeth  the 
temple  of  God  with 
"  images  1"  (2) 


Babes,  keep  your- 
selves   from     "  im- 


"  Neque  idolatry 
EidwXoXaTQcu,  efflcia- 
mini,"  sicut  quidam 
ex  ipsis. 


"  Neither  become 
ye  idolaters,"  as 
certain  of  them. 


"Be  not  wor- 
shippers of  images," 
as  some  of  them. 


Corrected. 


Corrected. 


Corrected  also  in 
this. 


SACRED    IMAGES. 


65 


(1)  Before  I  proceed  in  this,  let  me  ask  our 
English  translators,  what  is  the  most  proper, 
and  best  English  of  'didwlov,  cidwloWrpi?;,  sldwXo. 
XaTQsla  ;  idolum,  idolatra,  idolatria  ?  Is  it  not 
idol,  idolator,  idolatry  1  Are  not  these  plain 
English  words,  and  well  known  in  our  lan- 
guage ?  Why  then  need  they  put  three  words 
for  one,  "  worshipper  of  images,"  and  "  wor- 
shipping of  images  ?"  Whether  is  the  more 
natural  and  convenient  speech,  either  in  our 
English  tongue,  or  for  the  truth  of  the  thing  to 
say,  as  the  holy  scripture  does,  "covetousness 
is  idolatry  ;"  and  consequently,  "  the  covetous 
man  is  an  idolator ;"  or  to  say,  as  their  first  ab- 
surd translations  have  it,  "  covetousness  is 
worshipping  of  images,"  and  the  "  covetous  man 
is  a  worshipper  of  images  ?"  I  suppose  they  will 
scarcely  deny,  but  that  there  are  many  covetous 
Protestants,  and,  perhaps,  of  their  clergy  too, 
that  may  be  put  in  the  list  with  those  of  whom 
the  apostle  speaks,  when  he  says,  there  are 
some  "  whose  belly  is  their  god."  And  though 
these  make  an  idol  of  their  money,  and  their 
bellies,  by  covetousness  and  gluttony,  yet  they 
would  doubtless  take  it  ill  of  us,  if  in  their 
own  scripture  language,  we  should  call  them 
"  worshippers  of  images."  Who  sees  not, 
therefore,  what  great  difference  there  is  be- 
tween "  idol"  and  "  image,"  "  idolatry"  and 
"  worshipping  of  images  ?"  even  so  much  is 
there  between  St.  Paul's  words,  and  the  Pro- 
testant translation  ;  but  because  in  their  latter 
translations  they  have  corrected  this  shameful 
absurdity,  I  will  say  no  more  of  it. 


(2)  In  this  other,  not  only  their  malice,  but 
their  full  intent  and  set  purpose  of  deluding  the 
poor  simple  people  appear  ;  this  translation  being 
made  when  images  were  plucking  down  through- 
out England,  to  create  in  the  people  a  belief,  that 
the  apostle  spoke  against  sacred  images  in 
churches  ?  whereas  his  words  are  against  the 
idols  and  idolatry  of  the  Gentiles  ;  as  is  plain 
from  what  goes  before,  exhorting  them  not  to 
join  with  infidels  ;  for,  says  he,  "  How  agreeth 
the  temple  of  God  with  idols  ?"  not  "  with 
images,"  for  "  images"  might  be  had  without 
sin,  as  we  see  the  Jews  had  the  images  of  the 
cherubim  and  the  figures  of  oxen  in  the  temple, 
and  the  image  of  the  brazen  serpent  in  the 
wilderness,  by  God's  appointment ;  though,  as 
soon  as  they  began  to  make  an  idol  of  the 
serpent,  and  adore  it  as  their  god,  it  could  no 
longer  be  kept  without  sin.  By  this  corrupt 
custom  of  translating  image,  instead  of  idol,  they 
so  bewitched  their  deceived  followers,  as  to 
make  them  despise,  contemn,  and  abandon  even 
the  very  sign  and  image  of  salvation,  the  cross 
of  Christ,  and  the  crucifix ;  whereby  the  man- 
ner of  his  bitter  death  and  passion  is  represent- 
ed ;  notwithstanding  their  signing  and  marking 


their  children  with  it  in  their  baptism,  when 
they  are  first  made  Christians. 

By  such  wilful  corruptions,  in  these  and  other 
texts,  as,  "  Be  not  worshippers  of  images,  as 
some  of  them  ;"  and,  "  Babes,  keep  yourselves 
from  images  ;"  which,  the  more  to  impress  on 
the  minds  of  the  vulgar,  they  wrote  upon  their 
church  walls ;  the  people  were  animated  to 
break  down,  and  cast  out  of  their  churches,  the 
images  of  our  blessed  Saviour,  of  his  blessed 
mother,  the  twelve  apostles,  &c,  with  so  full 
and  general  a  resolution  of  defacing  and  extir- 
pating all  tokens  or  marks  of  our  Saviour's  pas- 
sion, that  they  broke  down  the  very  crosses  from 
the  tops  of  church  steeples,  where  they  could 
easily  come  to  them.  And  though,  in  their 
latter  translations,  they  have  corrected  this  cor- 
ruption ;  yet  do  some  of  the  people  so  freshly, 
to  this  day,  retain  the  malice  impressed  by  it 
upon  their  parents,  that  they  have  presumed  to 
break  the  cross  lately  set  on  the  pinnacle  of  the 
porch  of  Westminster  abbey  :  and  the  more  to 
show  their  spite  towards  that  sacred  sign  of  our 
redemption — the  holy  cross — they  placed  it,  not 
long  since,  upon  the  foreheads  of  bulls  and 
mastiff-dogs,  and  so  drove  them  through  the 
streets' of  London,  to  the  eternal  shame  of  such 
as  receive  it  in  their  baptism,  and  pretend  to 
Christianity.  What  could  Jews  or  Infidels  have 
done  more  ?  Was  it  not  enough  to  break  it 
down  from  the  tops  of  churches,  and  to  put  up 
the  image  of  a  dragon,  (the  figure  wherein  the 
devil  himself  is  usually  represented,)  as  on  Bow 
Church,  (a)  in  the  midst  of  the  city,  but  they 
must  place  it  so  contemptuously  on  the  fore- 
heads of  beasts  and  dogs  ? 


In  how  great  esteem  the  holy  cross  was  had 
by  primitive  Christians,  the  fathers  of  those  days 
have  sufficiently  testified  in  their  writings  : 
"  This  cross,"  says  St.  Chrysostom,  "  we  may 
see  solemnly  used  in  houses,  in  the  market,  in 
the  desert,  in  the  ways,  on  mountains  and  hills, 
in  valleys,"  &c,  contrary  to  which,  the  pretend- 
ed reformers  of  our  times  have  not  only  cast  it 
out  of  their  houses,  but  out  of  their  churches 
also  :  they  have  broken  it  down  from  all  market- 
places, from  hills,  mountains,  valleys,  and  high 
ways  ;  so  that  in  all  the  roads  in  England  there 
is  not  one  cross  left  standing  entire,  that  I  have 
ever  heard  of,  except  one  called  Ralph  cross, 
which  I  have  often  seen,  upon  a  wild  heath  or 
mountain,  near  Danby  forest,  in  the  north  riding 
of  Yorkshire.  (&) 


(a)  Why  might  not  a  cock  (the  animal  by  which  our 
Saviour  was  pleased  to  admonish  St.  Peter  of  his  sins) 
have  been  placed  upon  Covent  Garden  Church,  rather 
than  a  serpent  ?  ora  cross  on  Bow  Church,  rather  than 
a  dragon  1 

(b)  The  inhabitants  of  Danby,  Rosdale,  Westerdale 
and   Ferndale,  may  glory  before  all  parts  of  England, 
that  they  have  a  cross  standing  to  this  day  in  the  midst 
of  them. 


66 


XIV. — PROTECTANT  TRANSLATIONS  AGAINST 


The  Book. 

Chapter, 

and  Verse. 


The  Vulgate  Latin  Text. 


The  true  English  accord- 
ing to  the  Rhemish 
Translation. 


Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 
testant Bibles,  printed 
a.  D.  1562,  1577,  1579. 


The  last    Translation  of 

the  Protestant  Bible,  Ed. 

Lon.  an.  1683. 


1  Corinth, 
chap.  v. 
ver.  9.  10. 


Romans 
chap.  xi. 
verse  4. 


Acts  of 
the  Apos. 
chap.  xix. 
verse  35. 


Exodus 
chap.  xx. 
verse  4. 


Scripsi  vobis  in 
epislola,  ne  commis- 
ceamini  fornicariis, 
non  vtique  fornica- 
riis hujus  mundi,  aut 
avaris,  aut  rapaci- 
bus,  aut  "  idolis  ser- 
vientibus."  eldojlol&j- 
Qulg,  alioquin  dcbue- 
ratis  de  hoc  mundo 
eociissc :  nunc  autem 
scripsi  vobis  non 
commisceri ;  si  is  qui 
frater  nominatur,  est 
fornicator,  aut  ava- 
rus,  aut  "  idolis  ser- 
viens"  <fyc,  slduloXdcT. 
ooctg.  (1) 


Reliqui  mihi  sep- 
tem  millia  virorum 
qui  non  curvaverunt 
genua  "  ante  Baal" 
(2) 


Viri  Ephesi,  quis 
enim  est  hominum, 
qui  nesciat  Ephesio- 
rum  civitatem  cultri- 
cem  esse  magna 
Diana  et  "  Jovis 
prolix?"  tS  dion g  tug  ? 


Non    fades    tibi 
"sculptile,,y  ^25,  El'dw- 

1.0V. 


I  wrote  to  you  in 
an  epistle,  not  to 
keep  company  with 
fornicators  ;  I  mean, 
not  the  fornicators 
of  this  world,  or  the 
covetous,  or  the  ex- 
tortioners, or  "  ser- 
vers of  idols ;"  other- 
wise you  should 
have  gone  out  of  this 
world. 

But  now  I  have 
writ  to  you,  not  to 
keep  company ;  if 
he  that  is  named  a 
brother  be  a  forni- 
cator, or  covetous 
person,  or  a  "  ser- 
ver of  idols,"  &c. 


I  wrote  to  you 
"  that  you  should" 
not  company  with 
fornicators :  "  and" 
I  "  meant"  not  "  all 
of"  the  fornicators 
of  this  world,"either 
of"  the  covetous,  or 
extortioners,  "either 
the  idolaters,"  &c. 


But  "  that  ye" 
company  not  "  toge- 
ther ;"  if  "  any"  that 
is  "  called"  a  bro- 
ther be  a  fornica- 
tor, or  covetous,  or 
a  "  worshipper  of 
images,"  &c.  (1) 


I  have  left  me 
seven  thousand  men 
that  have  not  bowed 
their  knees  to  Baal. 


I  have  left  me 
seven  thousand  men 
that  have  not  bowed 
their  knees  to  "  the 
image  of"  Baal.  (2) 


Ye  men  of  Ephe- 
sus,  for  what  man  is 
there  that  knoweth 
not  the  city  of  the 
Ephesians  to  be  a 
worshipper  of  great 
Diana,  and  "  Jupi- 
ter's child  ?" 


Instead  of  "  Ju- 
piter's child,"  they 
translate  "the  image 
which  came  down 
from  Jupiter." 


Thou  shalt  not 
make  to  thyself  any 
graven  thing-." 


Thou  shalt  not 
make  to  thyself  any 
graven  image." 


It  is  corrected  in 
this  Bible. 


I  have  left  me 
seven  thousand  men 
that  have  not  bowed 
their  knees  to  "  the 
image  of"  Baal. 


And  here  they 
translate,  "  the  im- 
age which  fell  down 
from  Jupiter-" 


Thou  shalt  not 
make  to  thee  any 
"  graven  image." 


THE  USE  OF  SACRED  IMAGES. 


(1)  How  malicious  and  heretical  was  their 
intention,  who,  in  this  one  sentence,  made  St. 
Paid  seem  to  speak  two  distinct  things,  calling 
the  Pagans  "  idolaters,"  and  such  wicked 
Christians  as  should  commit  the  same  impiety, 
"  worshippers  of  images  ;"  whereas  the  apostle 
uses  but  one  and  the  self-same  Greek  word,  in 
speaking  both  of  Pagans  and  Christians  ?  It  is  a 
wilful  and  most  notorious  corruption  ;  for,  in  the 
first  place,  the  translators,  speaking  of  Pagans, 
render  the  word  in  the  text  "  idolater  ;"  but,  in 
the  latter  part  of  the  verse,  speaking  of  Chris- 
tians, they  translate  the  very  same  Greek  word, 
"  worshipper  of  images,"  and  what  reason  had 
they  for  this,  but  to  make  the  simple  and  igno- 
rant reader  think,  that  St.  Paul  speaks  here  not 
only  of  Pagan  idolaters,  but  also  of  Catholic 
Christians,  who  reverently  kneel  in  prayer  before 
the  holy  cross,  or  images  of  our  Saviour  Christ 
and  his  saints  ;  as  though  the  apostle  had  com- 
manded such  to  be  avoided  1  All  the  other  words, 
covetous,  fornicators,  extortioners,  they  trans- 
late alike,  in  both  places,  with  reference  both  to 
Pagans  and  Christians  :  yet  the  word  "  idola- 
ters" not  so,  but  Pagans  they  call  "  idolaters," 
and  Christians,  "  worshippers  of  images."  Was 
not  this  done  on  purpose,  to  make  both  seem 
alike,  and  to  intimate  that  Christians  doing 
reverence  before  sacred  images,  (which  Protes- 
tants call  worshipping  of  images,)  are  more  to 
be  avoided  than  the  Pagan  idolaters  ?  whereas 
the  apostle,  speaking  of  Pagans  and  Christians 
that  committed  one  and  the  self-same  heinous 
sin,  commands  the  Christian  in  that  case  to  be 
avoided  for  his  amendment,  leaving  the  Pagan 
to  himself,  and  to  God,  as  not  caring  to  judge 
him. 


(2)  Besides  their  falsely  translating  "  image" 
instead  of  "  idol,"  they  have  also  another  way  of 
falsifying  and  corrupting  the  scripture,  by  intro- 
ducing the  word  "  image"  into  the  text,  when,  in 
the  Hebrew  or  Greek,  there  is  no  such  thing  ; 
as  in  these  notorious  examples  :  "  to  the  image 
of  Baal :  the  image  that  came  down  from  Jupi- 
ter :"  where  they  are  not  content  to  understand 
"  image"  rather  than  "  idol,"  but  they  must  in- 
trude it  into  the  text,  though  they  know  full  well 
it  is  not  in  the  G'-^k. 

Not  unlike  this  kind  of  falsification,  is  that 
which  has  crept  as  a  leprosy  through  all  their 
Bibles,  and  which,  it  seems,  they  are  resolved 
never  to  correct,  viz.,  their  translating  sculptilc 
and  conjlalile,  graven  image,  and  molten  image  ; 
namely,  in  the  first  commandment ;  where  they 
cannot  be  ignorant,  that  in  the  Greek  it  is 
"  idol,"  and  in  the  Hebrew,  such  a  word  as  sig- 
nifies only  a  "  graven  thing,"  not  including  this 
word  "  image."  They  know  that  God  com- 
manded to  make  the  images  of  cherubim,  and 
of  oxen  in  the  temple,  and  of  the  brazen  serpent 
in  the  desert ;  and  therefore,  their  wisdoms 
might  have  considered,  that  he  forbad  not  all 
graven  images,  but  such  as  the  Gentiles  make, 
and  worshipped  for  gods  ;  and  therefore,   Non 


67 

fades  till  sculptile,  coincide  with  those  words 
that  go  before,  "  Thou  shalt  have  no  other  gods 
but  me."  For  so  to  have  an  image,  as  to  make  it 
a  god,  is  to  maice  it  more  than  an  image  :  and 
therefore  when  it  is  an  idol,  as  were  the  idols  of 
the  Gentiles,  then  it  is  forbidden  by  this  com- 
mandment. Otherwise,  when  the  cross  stood 
many  yetrs  upon  the  table,  in  Queen  Elizabeth's 
chapel,  pray  was  it  against  this  commandment  ? 
or  was  it  idolatry  in  her  majesty,  and  her  coun- 
sellors, that  appointed  it  there  ?  Or  do  their 
brethren  the  Lutherans  beyond  seas,  at  this  day, 
commit  idolatry  against  this  commandment,  who 
have  in  their  churches  the  crucifix,  and  the  holy 
images  of  the  mother  of  God,  and  of  St.  John 
the  evangelist  1  Or  if  the  whole  story  of  the 
Gospel  concerning  our  Saviour  Christ,  were 
drawn  in  pictures  and  images  in  their  churches, 
as  it  is  in  many  of  ours,  would  they  say,  it  were 
a  breach  of  this  commandment  ?  Fie  for  shame  ! 
fie  for  bhame !  that  they  should  with  such  into- 
lerable impudence  and  deceit  abuse  and  bewitch 
the  ignorant  people  against  their  own  knowledge 
and  consciences. 


For  do  they  not  know,  that  God  many  times 
farbad  the  Jews  either  to  marry  or  converse 
with  the  Gentiles,  lest  they  might  fall  to  wor- 
ship their  idols,  as  Solomon  did,  and  as  the 
psalm  reports  of  them  ?  This  then  is  the 
meaning  of  fiie  commandment,  neither  to  make 
the  idols  of  the  Gentiles,  nor  any  other,  either 
like  them,  or  as  Jeroboam  did  in  Dan  and  Be- 
thel, (a)  By  this  commandment  we  are  forbid- 
den, (not  to  make  images,  but)  to  make  idols, 
or  to  worship  images,  or  anything  else,  as  God. 
"  I  do  not,"  says  St.  John  Damascene,  "  worship 
an  image  as  God  ;  but  by  the  images  and  saints 
I  give  honour  and  adoration  to  God  ;  for  whose 
sake  I  respect  and  reverence  those  that  are  his 
friends."  (b)  "  All  over  the  world,"  says  Pope 
Adrian  I.,  "  wheresoever  Christianity  is  pro- 
fessed, sacred  images  are  honoured  by  the 
faithful,  &c.  By  the  image  of  the  body  which 
the  Son  of  God  took  for  our  redemption,  wc 
adore  our  Redeemer  who  is  in  heaven  ;  far  be  it 
from  us,  that  we  (as  some  calumniate)  should 
make  gods  of  images  ;  we  only  express  the  lova 
and  zeal  we  have  for  God,  and  his  saints  :  and 
as  we  keep  the  books  of  the  holy  scripture,  so 
do  we  the  images,  to  remind  us  of  our  duty, 
still  preserving  entire  the  purity  of  our  faith." 
(c).  Learn  from  St.  Jerom,  after  what  manner 
they  made  use  of  holy  images  in  his  time  ;  he 
writes  in  the  epitaph  of  Paula,  "  that  she  adored 
prostrate  on  the  ground,  before  the  cross,  as  if 
she  saw  our  Lord  hanging  on  it."  And  in 
Jonas,  chap,  iv.,  he  proves,  that  out  of  the 
veneration  and  love  they  had  for  the  apostles, 
they  generally  painted  their  images  on  the  ves- 
sels, which  are  called  Saucomaries-  And  will 
Protestants  say,  that  this  was  idolatry  1 


(a)  3  Kings  xii.  28;  Psal.  cv.  19. 

(b)  St.  Jo.  Damas.,  Orat.  3. 

(c)  Adrian  I,  pontif.,  Ep.  ad  Constan.  et  Irenae.  Im^p. 


88 


JLV, PROTESTANT  TRANSLATIONS  AGAINST 


The  Book, 

Chapter, 

and  Verse. 


Isaiah 
chap.  xxx. 
verse  22, 


Habba 
chap.  ii. 
verse  18. 


Daniel 
chap.  xiv. 
verse  4. 


The  Vulgate  Latin  Text. 


Et  contaminabis 
laminas  "  sculptili- 
um"  argenti  tui,  et 
vestimenlum  "  con- 
flatilis"  auri  tui,  fye. 
(1) 


Quid  prodest 
"  sculptile"  quia 
sculpsit  Mud  fictor 
suus  "  C07ijlatile,"  et 
"imaginemfalsam? 


w  ~\  ylvmov  < 
2'    J  xarFV/xa- 


Quia  non  colo 
"  idola"  rnanufacta, 
eido)i.a    XBiQononjia. 


(2) 


The  true  English  accord- 
ing to  the  Rhemish 
Translation. 


And  thou  shalt  con- 
taminate the  plates 
of  the  "  sculptiles" 
of  thy  silver,  and 
the  garment  of  the 
"  molten  "  of  thy 
gold. 


What  profiteth  the 
"  thing  engraven," 
that  the  forger 
thereof  hath  graven 
it  a  "  molten,"  and 
a  "  false  image  V 


Because  1  wor- 
ship not  "  idols  " 
made  with  hands. 


Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 
testant Bibles,  printed 
A.  D.  1562,  1577,  1579. 


Ye  shall  defile 
also  the  covering  of 
the  "graven  images" 
of  silver,  and  the  or- 
nament of  thy  "mol- 
ten images"  of  gold. 
(0 


What  profiteth 
the  "  image,"  for 
the  maker  thereof 
hath  made  it  an 
"  image,  "  and  a 
"  teacher  of  lies  ?" 


I  worship  not 
"  things "  that  be 
made  with  hands. 
(2) 


The  last  Translation  of 

the  Protestant  Bible,  Ed. 

Lon.,  an.  1683. 


In  this  also  they 
translate  "  graven  " 
and  "  molten  im- 
ages, "  instead  of 
"graven"  and  "mol- 
ten things,  "  or 
"  idols  " 


What  profiteth 
the  "graven  image," 
that  the  maker  there- 
of hath  graven  it, 
the  "molten  image," 
and  a  "  teacher  of 
lies  ?" 


Though  they  have 
corrected  it,  yet  the 
two  last  chapters  are 
omitted  in  their 
small  impressions 
for  Apocrypha. 


THE    USE    OF    SACRED    IMAGES. 


69 


(1)  The  two  Hebrew  words,  pesilim  and  mas- 
secholh,  which  in  the  Latin,  signify  sculptilia  and 
confiatiliu,  they  in  their  translation  render  into 
English  by  the  word  images,  neither  word  being 
Hebrew  for  an  image  ;  thus,  if  one  should  ask, 
what  is  the  Latin  for  an  image  ?  and  they 
should  tell  him  sculplile.  Whereupon  he  seeing 
a  fair  painted  image  on  a  table,  might  perhaps 
say,  Ecce  cgregium  sculptile  ;  which,  doubtless, 
every  boy  in  the  grammar-school  would  laugh 
at.  And  this  I  tell  them,  because  I  perceive 
their  endeavour  to  make  sculptile  and  image  of 
the  same  import ;  which  is  most  evidently  false 
as  to  their  great  shame  appears  from  these 
words  of  Habbakuk ;  Quid  prodest  sculptile  ? 
&c,  which,  contrary  to  the  Hebrew  and  Greek, 
they  translate,  "  What  profiteth  the  image  V 
&c,  as  you  may  see  in  the  former  page. 


I  wish  every  common  reader  were  able  to  dis- 
cern their  falsehood  in  this  place  :  first,  they 
make  sculpere  sculptile  no  more  than  "  to  make 
an  image  ;"  which  being  absurd,  as  I  have  hinted, 
(because  the  painter  or  embroiderer  making  an 
image  cannot  be  said  sculpere  sculptile,)  might 
teach  them  that  the  Hebrew  has  in  it  no  signifi- 
cation of  image,  no  more  than  sculpere  can 
signify  "  to  make  an  image :"  and  therefore 
the  Greek  Ivnritv,  and  the  Latin  sculptile,  pre- 
cisely, for  the  most  part,  express  neither  more 
nor  less  than  a  "  thing  graven  ;"  but  yet  mean 
always  by  these  words,  a  "  graven  idol,"  to 
which  signification  they  are  appropriated  by  use 
of  holy  scripture ;  as  are  also  simulacrum, 
idolum,  conjlulile,  as  sometimes  imago  :  in  wThich 
sense  of  signifying  idols,  if  they  did  repeat 
images  so  often,  although  the  translation  were 
not  precise  ;  yet  it  would  be  in  some  part  toler- 
able, because  the  sense  would  be  so  ;  but  when 
they  do  it  to  bring  all  holy  images  into  contempf, 
even  the  image  of  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ  cru- 
cified, they  may  justly  be  controlled  for  false  and 
heretical  translators.  Conjlatile  here  also  they 
falsely  translate  image,  as  they  did  before  in 
Isaiah,  and  as  they  have  done  sculptile,  though 
two  different  words  ;  and,  as  is  said,  each  signi- 
fying a  thing  different  from  image.  But  where 
they  should  translate  image,  as,  Imaginem 
faham,  "  a  false  image,"  they  translate  another 
thing,  without  any  necessary  pretence  either  of 
Hebrew  or  Greek,  clearly  avoiding  here  the 
name  of  image,  because  this  place  tells  them, 
that  the  holy  scripture  speaketh  against  false 
images  ;  or,  as  themselves  translate,  such  im- 
ages as  teach  lies,  representing  false  gods,  which 
are  not.  Idolum  nihil  est,  as  the  apostle  says, 
et  non  sunt  dii,  qui  manibus  Jiunt.  Which 
distinction  of  false  and  true  images,  our  Protes- 
tant translators  will  not  have,  because  they 
condemn  all  images,  even  holy  and  sacred  also  ; 
10 


and  therefore  make  the  holy  scriptures  to  speak 
herein  according  to  their  own  fancies.  What 
monstrous  and  intolerable  deceit  is  this ! 


(2)  Wherein  they  proceed  so  far,  that 
when  Daniel  said  to  the  king,  "  I  worship  not 
idols  made  with  hands,"  they  make  him  say,  "  I 
worship  not  things  that  be  made  with  hands," 
leaving  out  the  word  idols  altogether,  as  though 
he  had  said,  nothing  made  with  hands  was  to  be 
adored,  not  the  ark,  nor  the  propitiatory,  no, 
nor  the  holy  cross  itself,  on  which  our  Saviour 
shed  his  precious  blood.  As  before  they  added 
to  the  text,  so  here  they  diminish  and  take  from 
it  as  boldly  as  if  there  had  never  been  a  curse 
denounced  against  such  manglers  of  holy  scrip 
ture. 


See  you  not,  that  it  is  not  enough  for  them  to 
corrupt  and  falsify  the  text,  and  to  add  and 
take  away  words  and  sentences  at  their  plea- 
sure, but  their  unparalleled  presumption  em- 
boldens them  to  deprive  the  people  of  whole 
chapters  and  books,  as  the  two  last  chapters  of 
Daniel,  and  the  rest  which  they  call  Apocrypha, 
which  are  quite  left  out  in  their  new  Bibles. 
When  all  this  is  done,  the  poor  simple  people 
must  be  glad  of  this  castrated  Bible,  for  their 
"  only  rule  of  faith."      Vce  !  v<b  ! 


The  reason  they  give  for  rejecting  them  is, 
as  I  told  you  above,  "  that  they  have  formerly 
been  doubted  of;"  but  if  you  demand,  why  they 
do  not,  for  the  same  reason,  reject  a  great  many 
more  in  the  New  Testament?  the  whole  Church 
of  England  answers  you  in  Mr  Rogers'  words, 
and  by  him,  "  Howbeit  we  judge  them  (viz., 
books  formerly  doubted  of  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment) canonical,  not  so  much  because  learned 
and  godly  men  in  the  church  so  have,  and  do 
receive  and  allow  of  them,  as  fox  that  the  Holy 
Spirit  in  our  hearts  doth  testify  that  they  are 
from  God."  See  Rogers'  Defence  of  the  Thirty- 
nine  Articles,  pages  31,  32.  So  that  Protestants 
are  purely  beholden  to  the  private  spirit  in  the 
hearts  of  their  convocation-men,  for  almost  half 
the  NeAV  Testament ;  which  had  neirer  been  ad- 
mitted by  them  in  the  canon  of  scripture,if  the  said 
"  private  spirit  in  their  hearts  had  not  testified 
their  being  from  God  ;"  no  more  than  the  rest 
called  Apocrypha,  which  they  not  only  thrust 
out  of  the  canon,  but  omit  to  publish  in  their 
smaller  impressions  of  the  Bible ;  because, 
forsooth,  the  holy  private  spirit  in  their  hen  Us 
testifies  them  to  speak  too  expressly  against  their 
heretical  doctrines. 


70 


XVI. PROTESTANT  TRANSLATIONS  AGAINST 


The  Book, 

Chapter, 

and  Verse. 


The  Vulgate  Latin  Text. 


The  true  English  accord- 
ing to  the  Rhemiih 
Translation. 


Corruptions   in   the  Pro- 
testant Bibles,  printed 
A.  d.  1562,  1577,  1579. 


The  last    Translation  of 

the  Protestant  Bible,  Ed. 

Lon.  an.  1683. 


Acts  of 
the  Apos. 
chap.  ii. 
verse  27. 


Genesis 
ch.  xxxvii. 
verse  35 


Genesis 
chap.  xlii. 
verse  38. 


Genesis 
chap.  xliv. 
verses  29, 
31. 


Quoniam  non  de- 
relinques  "  animam 
meam  in  inferno." 


Because  thou  "wilt'! 
not  leave  my  "  soul 
in  hell." 


Thou  "  shalt"  not 
leave  my  "  carcase 
in  the  grave."  — 
Beza. 

Thou  wilt  not 
leave  my  "  soul  in 
the  grave." — (Bible 
1579.)  (1) 


It  is  corrected  in 
this  translation. 


Desccndam  adfi- 
lium  meum  lugens  in 
"  infernum, "  ^», 
&drjg,  infernus ;  for 
so  are  the  Hebrew, 
Greek,  and  Latin 
words  for  hell. (2) 


I  will  go  down  to 
my  son  into  "  hell  " 
mourning. 


I  will  go  down 
into  "  the  grave  un- 
to" my  son  mourn- 
ing.^) 


I  will   go   down 
into  the  "  grave." 


Deducetis  canos 
rneos  cum  dolore  ad 
"  inferos." 


You  will  bring 
down  my  grey  hairs 
with  sorrow  unto 
"  hell." 


Instead  of"  hell," 
they  say  "grave." 


Deducetis  canos 
meos  cum  mozrore  ad 
"  inferos." 


—  With    sorrow 
unto  "  hell." 


—  With    sorrow 
unto  "  the  grave." 


3  Kings 
chap.  ii. 
verses  6,  9. 


—  Ad  "  inferos." 


—  Unto  "hell." 


— "To the  grave." 


For  "  hell,"  they 
also  say,  "  grave." 


—  With   sorrow 
unto  the  "  grave." 


—  "  To  the  grave." 


LIMBUS    PATRUM    AND    PURGATORY, 


71 


The  doctrine  of  our  pretended  reformers  is, 
that  "there  was  never,  from  the  beginning  of 
the  world,  any  other  place  for  souls,  after  this 
life,  but  only  two,  to  wit,  heaven  for  the  blessed, 
and  hell  for  the  damned."  This  heretical  doc- 
trine includes  many  erroneous  branches  :  First, 
that  all  the  holy  patriarchs,  prophets,  and  other 
noly  men,  of  the  Old  Testament,  went  not  into 
the  third  place,  called  Abraham's  bosom,  or 
limbus  patrum  ;  but  immediately  to  heaven : 
that  they  were  in  heaven  before  our  blessed  Sa- 
viour had  suffered  death  for  their  redemption  ; 
whence  it  will  follow,  that  our  Saviour  was  not  the 
first  man  that  ascended,  and  entered  into  heaven. 
Moreover,  by  this  doctrine  it  will  follow,  that 
our  Saviour  Christ  descended  not  into  any 
third  place,  in  our  creed  called  hell,  to  deliver 
the  fathers  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  to  bring 
them  triumphantly  with  him  into  heaven  :  and 
so,  that  article  of  the  Apostle's  Creed,  con- 
cerning our  Saviour's  descent  into  hell,  must 
either  be  put  out,  as  indeed  it  was  by  Beza  in 
the  confession. of  his  faith,  printed  anno  1564, 
or  it  must  have  some  other  meaning  ;  to  wit, 
either  the  lying  of  the  body  in  the  grave,  or,  as 
Calvin  and  his  followers  will  have  it,  the  suf-  j 
fering  of  hell  torments,  and  pains  upon  the 
cross,  (a) 


(1)  In  defence  of  these  erroneous  doctrines, 
they  most  wilfully  corrupt  the  holy  scriptures  ; 
and  especially  Beza,  who  in  his  New  Testament, 
printed  by  Robert  Stephens,  anno  1556,  makes 
our  Saviour  Christ  say  thus  to  his  Father,  Non 
dcrelinqucs  cadaver  mcum  in  sepulchro  ;  for  that 
which  the  Hebrew,  Greek,  and  Latin,  and  St. 
Ilierom,  according  to  the  Hebrew,  say,  Non 
direlittques  animam  meant  in  inferno.  Thus 
the  prophet  David  speaks  it  in  Hebrew  :  (/>) 
thus  the  Septuagint  uttered  it  in  Greek :  thus 
the  apostle  St.  Peter  alleges  it:  thus  St.  Luke 
in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  :  and  for  this,  St. 
Augustine  calls  lain  an  infidel  that  denies  it. 
Yet  all  this  would  not  suffice  to  make  Beza 
translate  it  so  ;  because,  as  he  says,  he  would 
avoid  ( certain  errors,  as  he  calls  them )  the 
Catholic  doctrine  of  limbus  patrum  and  purga- 
tory. And  therefore,  because  else  it  would 
make  for  the  Papists'  doctrine,  he  translates 
animam,  carcase  ;  infernum,  grave,  (c) 


And  though  our  English  translators  are 
ashamed  of  this  foul  and  absurd  corruption,  yet 
their  intention  appears  to  come  not  much,  if  any 
thing  at  all,  short  of  Beza's  ;  for,  in  their  Bible 
of  1579,  they  have  it  in  the  text,  "Thou  wilt 
not  leave  my  soul  in  the  grave,"  and  in  the 
margin  they  put,  "  or  life,  or  person  ;"  thereby 


(a)  Calvin's  Instit,  lib.  2,  c.  16,  sect.  10,  and  in  his 
Catechism. 

(b)  Psal.xv.  10. 

(c)  See  Beza's  Annotat.  in  Act.  ii. 


advertising  the  reader,  that  if  it  please  him,  he 
may  read  thus,  "  Thou  shalt  not  leave  my  life  in 
the  grave,"  or,  "  Thou  shalt  not  leave  my  per- 
son in  the  grave  :"  as  though  either  man's  soul 
or  life  were  in  the  grave,  or  anima  might  be 
translated  person.  I  said,  they  were  ashamed 
of  Beza's  translation  ;  but  one  would  rather 
think,  they  purposely  designed  to  make  it  worse, 
if  possible.  But  you  see  the  last  translators 
have  indeed  been  ashamed  of  it,  and  have  cor- 
rected it.  See  you  not  now,  what  monstrous 
and  absurd  work  our  first  pretended  reformers 
made  of  the  holy  scriptures,  on  purpose:  to  make 
it  speak  for  their  own  terms  ?  By  their  putting 
grave  in  the  text,  they  design  to  make  it  a  cer- 
tain and  absolute  conclusion,  howsoever  you 
interpret  soul,  that  the  holy  scripture,  in  this 
place,  speaks  not  of  Christ's  being  in  heil,  but 
o.:lv  in  the  grave  ;  and  that  according  to  his 
soul,  life,  or  person  ;  or,  as  Boza  says,  his  car- 
case. And  so  his  "  soul  in  hell,"  as  the  scrip- 
ture speaks,  must  be  his  carcase,  soul,  or  life  in 
the  grave,  with  them.  But  St.  Chrysostom 
says,  ((/)  "  He  descended  to  hell,  that  the  souls 
which  were  there  bound,  might  be  locsr-d."  And 
the  words  of  St.  Irenaeus  are  equally  plain : 
•*  During  the  three  days  he  conversed  where 
the  dead  were  :  ru  the  prophecy  says  of  him,  he 
remembered  his  holy  ones  who  were  dead,  those 
who  before  slept  in  the  land  of  promise  ;  he 
descended  to  them,  to  fetch  them  out,  and  Wive 
them."  (e) 


(2)  How  absurd  also  is  this  corruption  of 
theirs,  "  I  will  go  down  into  the  grave  unto  my 
son  ?"  as  though  Jacob  thought  that  his  son 
Joseph  had  been  buried  in  a  grave  ;  whereas,  a 
little  before,  he  said,  that  some  "  wild  beast 
had  devoured  him."  But  if  they  mean  the  state 
of  all  dead  men,  by  grave,  why  do  they  call  it 
gTave,  and  not  hell,  as  the  word  is  in  Hebrew, 
Greek,  and  Latin  ?  But  I  must  demand  of  oiu 
latter  translators,  why  they  did  not  correct  this, 
as  they  have  done  the  former,  seeing  the  Hebrew, 
Greek,  and  Latin  words  are  the  same  in  both  ? 
It  cannot  be  through  ignorance,  I  find  :  no,  it 
must  have  been  purely  out  of  a  design  to  make 
their  ignorant  readers  believe,  that  the  patri- 
arch Jacob  spoke  of  his  body  only  to  descend 
into  the  grave  to  Joseph's  body :  for  as  con- 
cerning Jacob's  soul,  that,  by  their  opinion,  was 
to  ascend  immediately  after  his  death  into 
heaven,  and  not  descend  into  the  grave.  But 
if  Jacob  were  forthwith  to  ascend  in  soul,  how 
could  he  say,  as  they  translate,  "  I  will  go  down 
into  the  grave,  unto  my  son,  mourning  ?"  as  if, 
according  to  their  opinion,  he  should  say  :  "  My 
son's  body  is  devoured  by  a  beast,  and  his  soul 
is  gone  up  to  heaven  :"  well,  "  I  will  go  down 
to  him  into  the  grave. " 


(d)  St.  Chrys.  in  Eph.  iv. 

(e)  S.  Irenaeus,  lib.  5,  fine. 


72 


XVI. PROTESTANT  TRANSLATIONS  AGAINST 


The  Rook, 

Chapter, 

and  Verse. 


Ps.  lxxxv. 
verse  13. 


Ps.  lxxxix. 

verse  49. 


Hosea 
chap.  xiii. 
verse  14. 


1  Corinth, 
chap.  xv. 
verse  55. 


Psalm  vi. 
verse  5. 


Proverbs 
ch.  xxvii. 
verse  20. 


Hebrews 
chap.  v. 
verse  7. 


The  Vulgate  Latin  Text. 


Et  eruisti  animam 
meam  ex  "  inferno 
inferiori."  (1) 


Eruit  animam 
suam  manu  "  in- 
feri  r  (2) 


Ero  mors  tua,  O 
mors,  morsus  tuns 
ero  "  inferne,"  ^"SW- 


Ubi  est,  murs,  sti- 
mul'S  tuus?  ubi  est 
"  inferne"  victoria 
tua?  adq. 


In  "inferno"  autem 
quis  conftebitur  libi  ? 


"  Tnfernus"  et  per- 
ditio  nunquam  im- 
plentur. 


"  Qui"  in  diebus 
carnis  sum  preces 
supplicationesque  ad 
eum,  qui  possit  ilium 
salvum  facere  a 
morte,  cum  clamore 
valido  et  lachrymis 
offer  ens,  exauditus 
est  "pro  sua  reve- 
renfia,"  &nb  ttj?  £vXot- 
§sla?.  (3) 


The  true  English  accord- 
ing to  the  Rhemish 
Translation. 


Thou  hast  deli- 
vered my  soul  from 
the  "  lower  hell." 


Shall  he  deliver 
his  soul  from  the 
hand  of  "  hell  ?" 


O  death,  I  will  be 
thy  death ;  I  will  be 
thy  sting,  O  "  hell." 


Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 
testant BiUes,  printed 
a.  D.  1562,  1577,  1579. 


Where  is,  O  death, 
thy  sting  ?  where  is, 
O  "hell,"  thy  vic- 
tory. 


But  in  "hell," 
who  shall  confess  to 
thee? 


"  Hell  and  de- 
struction are  never 
full. 


"  Who"  in  the 
days  of  his  flesh, 
with  a  strong  cry 
and  tears,  offering 
prayers  and  suppli- 
cations to  him  that 
could  save  him  from 
death,  was  heard 
"  for  his  reverence." 


Thou  hast  deli- 
vered my  soul  from 
the  "  lowest  grave." 
(1) 


Shall  he  deliver 
his  soul  from  the 
hand  of  the  "grave?" 
(2) 


—  O  "grave,"  I 
will  be  thy  destruc- 
tion. 


O  death,  where 
is  thy  sting?  O 
"  grave,"  where  is 
thy  victory  ? 


They  say, "  in  the 
grave." 


"  The  grave"  and 
destruction  are  ne- 
ver full. 


"  Which"  in  days 
of  his  flesh,  "offered 
up"  prayers,  with 
strong  "  crying,  un- 
to" him  that  "  was 
able  to"  save  him 
from  death,  "  and" 
was  heard,  "  in  that 
which  he  feared." 
(3) 


The  last  Translation  of 

the  Protestant  Bible,  Ed. 

Lon.,  an.  1683. 


Instead  of  "lower" 
hell,  thev  say,  "low- 
est" hell"! 


Shall  he  deliver 
his  soul  from  the 
hand  of  the  "grave7" 


O  death,  I  will  be 
thy  "  plagues  ;"  O 
"  grave,"  I  will  be 
thy  destruction. 


For  "hell,"  they 
say,  "  grave." 


In  the  "  grave," 
who  shall  "give  thee 
thanks  ?" 


Corrected 


"Who"  in  the 
days,  &c,  "  and 
was  heard  in  that  he 
feared." 


LIMBUS  PATRUM  AND  PURGATORY. 


73 


(1)  Understand,  good  reader,  that  in  the  Old 
Testament  none  ascended  into  heaven.  "  This 
way  of  the  holies,"  as  the  apostle  says,  "  being 
not  yet  made  open  ;"  (a)  because  our  Saviour 
Christ  himself  was  to  "  dedicate  that  new  and 
living  way,"  and  begin  the  entrance  in  his  own 
person,  and  by  his  passion  to  open  heaven  ;  for 
none  but  he  was  found  worthy  to  open  the 
seals,  and  to  read  the  book.  Therefore,  as  I 
said  before,  the  common  phrase  of  the  holy 
scriptures,  in  the  Old  Testament,  is,  even  of  the 
best  of  men,  as  well  as  others,  that  dying,  they 
went  down,  ad  inferos,  or  ad  infernum  ;  that  is, 
descended  not  to  the  grave,  which  received  their 
bodies  only  ;  but  ad  inferos,  "  into  hell,"  a  com- 
mon receptacle  for  their  souls. 


So  we  say  in  our  creed,  that  our  Saviour 
Christ  himself  descended  into  hell,  according 
to  his  soul.  So  St.  Hierom,  speaking  of  the 
state  of  the  Old  Testament,  (b)  says,  "  If 
Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob  were  in  hell,  who 
was  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven  ?"  and  again, 
"  Before  the  coming  of  Christ,  Abraham  was  in 
hell ;  after  his  coming,  the  thief  was  in  paradise." 
And  lest  it  might  be  objected,  that  Lazarus 
being  in  Abraham's  bosom,  saw  the  rich  glutton 
afar  off  in  hell :  and  that  therefore  both  Abra- 
ham and  Lazarus  seem  to  have  been  in  heaven, 
the  same  holy  doctor  resolves  it,  that  Abraham 
and  Lazarus  also  were  in  hell,  but  in  a  place  of 
great  rest  and  refreshing  ;  and  therefore  very 
far  off  from  the  miserable  wretched  glutton, 
that  lay  in  torments,  which  is  also  agreeable  to 
St.  Augustine's  interpretation  of  this  place,  (c) 
in  the  Psalm,  "  Thou  hast  delivered  my  soul 
from  the  lower  hell,"  who  makes  this  sense  of  it, 
that  the  lower  hell  is  the  place  wherein  the 
damned  are  toi  merited  ;  the  higher  hell  is  that 
wherein  the  souls  of  the  just  rested,  calling  both 
places  by  the  name  of  hell.  To  avoid  this  dis- 
tinction of  the  inferior  and  higher  hell,  our  first 
translators,  instead  of  lower  hell,  rendered  it 
lowest  grave  ;  which  they  would  not  for  shame 
have  done,  had  they  not  been  afraid  to  say  in 
any  place  of  scripture  (how  plain  soever)  that 
any  soul  was  delivered  or  returned  from  hell, 
lest  it  might  then  follow,  that  the  patriarchs 
and  our  Saviour  Christ  were  in  such  a  hell ; 
and  though  the  last  translation  has  restored  the 
word  hell  in  this  place  ;  yet  so  loath  were  our 
translators  to  hear  the  scripture  speak  of  limbus 
patrum  or  purgatory,  that  they  still  retained 
the  superlative  lowest,  lest  the  comparative 
lower  (which  is  the  true  translation)  might  seem 
more  clearly  to  evince  this  distinction  between 
the  superior  and  inferior  hell ;  though  they 
could  not  at  the  same  time  be  ignorant  of  this 


(a)  Heb.  ix.  8;  x.  20. 

(b)  Epitaph.  Nepot.  cap.  3. 

(c)  St.  Aug.  in  Ps.  lxxxv.  13. 


sentence  of  Tertullian  :  I  know  that  the  bosom 
of  Abraham  was  no  heavenly  place,  but  only  the 
higher  hell,  or  the  higher  part  of  hell."  (d)  Nor 
can  I  believe,  but  they  must  have  read  these  words 
in  St.  Chrysostom,  upon  that  place  of  Esai :  "  I 
will  break  the  brazen  gates,  and  bruise  the  iron 
bars  in  pieces,  and  will  open  the  treasure  dark- 
ened," <fcc  So  he  (the  prophet)  calls  hell,  says 
he  ;  "  for  although  it  were  hell,  yet  it  held  the 
holy  souls,  and  precious  vessels,  Abraham, 
Isaac,  and  Jacob."  (e) 


(2)  And  thus  all  along,  wherever  they  find 
the  word  hell,  that  is,  where  it  signifies  the 
place  in  which  the  holy  fathers  of  the  Old 
Testament  rested,  called  by  the  church  li?nbus 
palrum,  they  are  sure  to  translate  it  grave  ;  a 
word  as  much  contrary  to  the  signification  of 
the  Greek,  Hebrew,  or  Latin  words,  as  bread  is 
to  the  Latin  word  lac.  If  I  ask  them,  what  is 
Hebrew,  Greek,  or  Latin  for  hell,  must  they 
not  tell  me,  ^jx,  ydng,  infernus  ?  If  I  ask  them, 
what  words  they  will  bring  from  those  languages 
to  signify  grave,  must  they  not  say,  "OP,  i&<fog, 
sepulchrum  ?  With  what  face  then  can  they  look 
upon  these  wilful  corruptions  of  theirs  1 


(3)  Note  here  another  most  damnable  corrup- 
tion of  theirs  ;  instead  of  translating  as  all  anti- 
quity, with  a  general  and  full  consent,  has  ever 
done  in  this  place,  "  that  Christ  was  heard  of  his 
Father,  for  his  reverence  ;"  they  read,  "  that 
he  was  heard  in  that  which  he  feared ;"  or,  as 
this  last  Bible  has  it,  "  and  was  heard  in  that  he 
feared."  And  who  taught  them  this  sense  of 
the  text  ?  Doubtless  Beza  ;  whom,  for  the  most 
part,  they  follow  ;  and  he  had  it  from  Calvin, 
who,  he  says,  was  the  first  that  ever  found  out 
this  interpretation.  And  why  did  Calvin  invent 
this,  but  to  defend  his  blasphemous  doctrine, 
"  that  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  upon  the  cross, 
was  horribly  afraid  of  damnation :  and  that  he 
was  in  the  very  sorrows  and  torments  of  the 
damned  :  and  that  this  was  his  descending  into 
hell :  and  that  otherwise  he  descended  not." 
Note  this,  good  reader,  and  then  judge  to  what 
wicked  end  this  translation  tends.  Who  has 
ever  heard  of  greater  blasphemy  ;  and  yet  they 
dare  presume  to  force  the  scripture,  by  their 
false  translation,  to  back  them  in  it;  "  he  was 
heard  in  that  which  he  feared  ;"  as  if  they  should 
say,  he  was  delivered  from  damnation,  and  the 
eternal  pains  of  hell,  of  which  he  was  sore 
afraid.  What  dare  they  not  do,  who  tremble  not 
at  this  1 


(d)  Tertul.  1,  4,  adversus  Marcion. 

(c)  St.  Chrysobt.  Horn,  quod  Christus  sit  Deus,  to.  5. 


74 


XVII. PROTESTANT    TRANSLATIONS    AGAINST 


The  Book, 

Chapter, 

and  Verse. 


Romans 
chap.  ii. 
verse  26. 


St.  Luke 
chap.  i. 
verse  6. 


Apocalyp. 
chap.  xix. 
verse  8. 


2  Tiinoth. 
chap.  iv. 
verse  8. 


2  Thessal. 
chap.  i. 
verses  5,  6. 


Hebrews 
chap.  vi. 
verse  10, 


The  Vulgate  Latin  Text. 


Si  igitur  prceputium 
"justitias,"  dixaiw. 
/uecTuJegis  custodial, 

4-c.  (i) 


Erant autem  "justi," 
dixawl,  amho  ante 
Dcum,  incedentes  in 
omnibus  mandatis  et 
"  justificationibus,  " 
xai  dixixiw/.taoi, Domi- 
ni sine  querela. 


Byssinum  enim 
"justificationes"  sunt 
sanctorum,T«  dixaib)- 

fllXTOC. 


In  reliquo,  reposita 
est  mihi,corona  *'jus- 
titice,"  rtjs  Sixmoov- 
vr\g,quam  reddet  mihi 
Dominus  in  ilia  die 
"Justus"  judex,  6 
dixaiog  xqnrjg  andw- 
oaei,  (SfC  (2) 


—  In  exemplum 
" justi"  dixmag,  ju- 
dicii  Dei,  ut  digni 
habeamini  in  regno 
Dei,  pro  quo  et 
patiamini,  si  tamen 
justum  est,  dtxatvot' 
sgi,apud  Deum,retri- 
buere  tribulationem 
Us  qui  vos  tribulant. 


Non  enim  "  injus- 
tus,"  adixog,  Deus, 
ut  obliviscatur  operis 
vcslri,  <$fc. 


The  true  English  accord- 
ing to  the  Rhemish 
Translation. 


Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 
testant Bibles,  printed 
a.  d.  1562,  1577,  1579. 


If  then  the  pre- 
puce keep  the  "jus- 
tices" of  the  law,&c. 


And  they  were 
both  "just"  before 
God,  walking  in  all 
the  commandments 
and  "justifications" 
of  our  Lord,  without 
blame. 


For  the  silk  are 
the  "justifications" 
of  saints. 


Concerning  the 
rest,  there  is  laid 
up  for  me  a  crown 
of  "justice,"  which 
our  Lord  will  ren- 
der to  me  in  that 
day,  a  just  Judge. 


For  an  example 
of  the  "just"  judg- 
ment of  God,  that 
you  may  be  counted 
worthy  of  the  king- 
dom of  God,  for 
which  you  suffer, 
that  yet  it  be  "just" 
with  God  to  repay 
tribulations  to  them 
that  vex  you,  and 
to  you  that  are  vex- 
ed, rest  with  us,  &c. 


For  God  is  not 
"  unjust,"  that  he 
should  forget  your 
works,  &c. 


If  the  uncircum- 
cision  keep  the  "or- 
dinances"of  the  law. 
(1) 


And  they  were 
both  "righteous"  be- 
fore God,  walking 
in  all  the  command- 
ments and  "  ordi- 
nances" of  the  Lord 
blameless. 


For  the  "fine  linen" 
are  the  "  righteous- 
ness" of  saints. 


Henceforth  there 
is  laid  up  for  me  a 
crown  of  righteous- 
ness," which  the 
Lord  the  "  righte- 
ous"Judge  shall  give 
me,  &c.  (2) 


Rejoice,  &c 

which  is  a  token 
of  the  "  righteous" 
judgment  of  God, 
that  you  may  be 
counted  worthy  of 
the  kingdom  of  God, 
for  which  ye  suffer. 
For  it  is  a  "  righte- 
ous"thing  with  God, 
to  recompence  tri- 
bulation to  them 
that  trouble  you,  and 
to  you  that  are 
troubled,  rest. 


God  is  not  "un- 
righteous" to  forget 
your  good  works 
and  labour. 


The  last    Translation  of 

the  Protestant  Bible,  Ed. 

Lon.  an.  1C83. 


If  therefore  the 
uncircumcision  keep 
the  "righteousness" 
of  the  law. 


And  they  were 
both  "righteous"  be- 
fore God,  walking 
in  all  the  command- 
ments and  "  ordi- 
nances" of  the  Lord 
blameless. 


For  the  "  fine 
linen"  is  the  "  righ- 
teousness" of  saints 


For  "  justice, 
they  translate  "righ- 
teousness :"  and  for 
a  "just"  judge,  they 
say  a  "  righteous" 
judge. 


Here  also  they  say 
"  righteous"  judg- 
ment, and  "  righ- 
teous thing,"  instead 
of  "just,"  &c. 


For    God   is  not 
"  unrighteous,"  &c. 


JUSTIFICATION,  AND  THE  REWARD  OF  GOOD   WORKS. 


75 


(1)  As  the  article  of  justification  has  many 
/anches,  and  as  their  errors  therein  are  mani- 
oklj  so  are  their  English  translations  accord- 
ingly in  many  respects  false  and  heretical  :  first, 
against  justification  by  good  works,  and  by 
keeping  the  commandments,  they  suppress  the 
very  name  of  justification  in  all  such  places 
where  the  word  signifies  the  commandments, 
or  the  law  of  God  ;  and  where  the  Greek  signi- 
fies most  exactly  justices  and  justifications, 
according  as  our  Vulgate  Latin  translates, 
justitias  and  justificationes,  there  the  English 
translators  say,  statutes  or  ordinances ;  as  you 
see  in  these  examples,  where  their  last  transla- 
tion, because  they  would  seem  to  be  doing, 
though  to  small  purpose,  changes  the  first  cor- 
ruption, "  ordinances  of  the  law,"  into  righ- 
teousness ;  another  word,  as  far  from  what  it 
should  have  been,  in  comparison,  as  the  first  : 
and  to  what  end  is  all  this,  but  to  avoid  the 
term  justifications  ?  they  cannot  be  ignorant  how 
different  this  is  from  the  Greek,  which  they 
pretend  to  translate.  In  the  Old  Testament, 
perhaps  they  will  pretend  that  they  follow  the 
Hebrew  word,  which  is  fprt ;  and  therefore,  they 
translate  statutes  and  ordinances  ;  (righteousness 
too,  if  they  please  ;)  but  even  there  also,  are  not 
the  seventy  Greek  interpreters  sufficient  to 
teach  them  the  signification  of  the  Hebrew 
word,  who  always  interpret  it,  dixatojuaia  ;  in 
English,  justifications  ? 


But  admit  that  they  may  control  the  Septua- 
gint  in  the  Hebrew  ;  yet  in  the  New  Testament 
they  do  not  pretend  to  translate  the  Hebrew, 
but  rather  the  Greek.  What  reason  have  they 
then  for  rejecting  the  word  just  and  justifica- 
tions ?  Sureiy,  no  other  reason,  but  that  which 
their  master  Beza  gives  for  the  same  thing  ; 
saying,  that  "  he  rejected  the  word  justificationes, 
on  purpose  to  avoid  the  cavils  that  might  be 
made  from  this  word,  against  justification  by 
faith. "(a)  As  if  he  should  say,  this  word, 
truly  translated  according  to  the  Greek,  might 
minister  great  occasion  to  prove,  by  so  many 
places  of  scripture,  that  man's  justification  is  not 
by  faith  only,  but  also  by  keeping  the  law,  and 
observing  the  commandments  of  God  ;  which, 
therefore,  are  called  according  to  the  Greek 
and  Latin,  justificationes,  because  they  concur 
to  justification,  and  making  a  man  just :  as  by 
St.  Luke's  words,  also,  is  well  signified  ;  which 
have  this  allusion,  that  they  were  both  just,  be- 
cause they  walked  in  all  the  justifications  of  our 
Lord ;  which  they  designedly  suppress  by  other 
■words. 


(2)  And  hereof  it  also  rises,  that  when  Beza 


(a)  Beza  Annot.  in  Luk.  i. 


could  not  possibly  avoid  the  word  in  his  transla- 
tion, Apoc.  xix.  8,  "  the  silk  is  the  justification  of 
saints;"  he  helps  the  matter  with  this  commenta- 
ry, "  That  justifications  are  those  good  works, 
which  are  the  testimony  of  a  lively  faith."(6) 
But  our  English  translators  have  found  another 
way  to  avoid  the  word,  even  in  their  transla- 
tions :  for  they,  because  they  could  not  say 
ordinances,  translate,  "  the  righteousness  of 
saints;"  abhorring  the  word  "justifications  of 
saints  ;"  because  they  know  full  well,  that  this 
word  includes  the  good  wrorks  of  saints  :  which 
works,  if  they  should  in  translating,  call  their 
justifications,  it  would  rise  up  against  their  "  jus- 
tifications by  faith  only  :"  therefore,  where  they 
cannot  translate  ordinances  and  statutes,  which 
are  terms  farthest  off  from  justification,  they 
say,  righteousness,  making  it  also  the  plural 
number  ;  whereas  the  more  proper  Greek  word 
for  righteousness  is  evfli/xj?.;,  (Dan.  vi.  22,)  which 
there  some  of  them  translate,  unguiltiness, 
because  they  will  not  translate  exactly  if  you 
would  hire  them. 


And  by  their  translating  righteous,  instead  of 
just,  they  bring  it,  that  Joseph  was  a  righteous 
man,  rather  than  a  just  man  ;  and  Zachary  and 
Elizabeth  were  both  righteous  before  God, 
rather  than  just ;  because  when  a  man  is 
called  just,  it  sounds  that  he  is  so  indeed,  and 
not  by  imputation  only.  Note  also,  that  where 
faith  is  joined  with  the  word  just,  they  omit 
not  to  translate  it  just,  "  the  just  shall  live  by 
faith,"  to  signify,  that  "justification  is  by  faith 
alone,  "(c) 


(3)  These  places,  (2  Tim.,  2  Thess.,  and 
Heb.)  do  very  fairly  discover  their  false  and 
corrupt  intentions,  in  concealing  the  word  jus- 
tice in  all  their  Bibles ;  for,  if  they  should 
translate  truly,  as  they  ought  to  do,  it  would 
infer,  (d)  that  men  are  justly  crowned  in  heaven 
for  their  good  works  upon  earth,  and  it  is  God's 
justice  so  to  do  ;  and  that  he  will  do  so,  because 
he  is  a  just  Judge,  and  because  he  will  show 
his  just  judgment ;  and  he  will  not  forget  so  to 
do,  because  he  is  not  unjust;  as  the  ancient  fathers 
do  interpret  and  expound.  St.  Augustine  most 
excellently  declares,  that  it  is  God's  grace, 
favour,  and  mercy  in  making  us,  by  his  grace, 
to  live  and  believe  well,  and  so  to  be  worthy  of 
heaven  ;  and  his  justice  and  just  judgment, 
to  render  and  repay  eternal  life  for  those  works 
which  himself  wrought  in  us  :  which  he  thus 
expresses,  "  How  should  he  render  or  repay 
as  a  just  judge,  unless  he  had  given  it  as  a  mer- 
ciful Father  ?"  (e) 


(b)  Beza  Annot.  in  Apoc.  xix. 

(c)  Rom.  i. 

(</)  St.  Chrys.  Theodoret,  Oecumen.upon  these  places. 
(e)  St.  Aug.  de  Gra.  et  lib   Arbitr.,  cap.  Q. 


76 


XVIII. PROTESTANT    TRANSLATIONS    AGAINST 


The  Book, 

Chapter, 

and  Verse. 


Romans 
chap.  viii. 
verse  18. 


Hebrews 
chap.  x. 
verse  29. 


Coloss. 
chap.  i. 
verse  12. 


Ps.  cxviii. 
verse  112. 


Hebrews 
chap.  ii. 
verse  9. 


The  Vulgate  Latin  Text. 


"Existimo,"  Xoyl'Qo- 
ftai,  enim  quod  non 
sunt  "condignce  pas- 
siones"  hujus  tempo- 
ris  ad  futuram  glo- 
riutn,  6fC,  ax  «£t« 
nyog  xi]v  neXXaoav 
do^av.  (1) 


Quanto  magis  pu- 
tatis  "  deteriora  me- 
reri,  supplicia,"  noaot 
Xeiqovog  «£ loid^a ex at, 
TiftoQiag,  qui  Filium 
Dei  conculcaverit, 
eye.  (2) 


Gratias  agentes 
Deo  Patri,  qui  "  dig- 
nos"  ixuiioaavTi^nos 
fecit  in  partem  "sor- 
tis"  sanctorum  in  lu- 
mine.  (3) 


"  Inclinavi"  cor 
meum  ad  faciendas 
"justifications  tuas 
in  eternum,  propter 
retributionem"  (4) 


Eum  au tern  qui 
modico  quam  angeli 
"  minoratus  est,"  vi- 
demus  Jesum,  prop- 
ter "passionem"  mor- 
tis gloria  el  honor e 
coronatum.  (5) 


The  true  English  accord- 
ing to  the  Rhemish 
Translation. 


For  "I  think" 
that  the  "  passions" 
of  this  time  are  not 
"  condign  to"  the 
glory  to  come,  that 
shall  be  revealed  in 
us. 


How  much  more, 
think  you,  doth 
he  "  deserve  worse 
punishments,"  who 
hath  trodden  the 
Son  of  God  under- 
foot? 


Giving  thanks  to 
God  the  Father, 
who  hath  made  us 
"  worthy"  unto  the 
part  of  the  "  lot"  of 
the  saints  in  the 
light. 


I  have  "  inclined" 
my  heart  to  do  thy 
"justifications  for 
ever  for  reward." 


But  him  that  was 
a  little  "  lessened 
under"  the  angels, 
we  see  Jesus,  be- 
cause of  the  "  pas- 
sion'^ death,crown- 
ed  with  glory  and 
honour. 


Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 
testant Bibles,  printed 
A.  D.  15G2,  1577,  1579. 


For  I  am  "  cer- 
tainly persuaded," 
that  the  "afflictions" 
of  this  time  are  not 
"worthy  of"  the 
glory  which  shall  be 
in  us.  (1) 


How  much  "sorer 
shall  he  be  punish- 
ed," which  treadeth 
under-foot  the  Son 
of  God  ?  (2) 


Giving  thanks  to 
God  the  Father, 
"  that"  hath  made 
us  "  meet  to  be  par- 
takers" of  the  "  in- 
heritance" of  the 
saints  in  light.  (3) 


I  have  "  applied" 
my  heart  to  fulfil 
thy  "statutes  always 
even  unto  the  end." 
(4) 


We  see  Jesus 
crowned  with  glory 
and  honour,"  which" 
was  a  "  little  infe- 
rior to"  the  angels, 
"  through"  the  "suf- 
fering"    of    death. 


(5) 


The  last    Translation  of 

the  Protestant  Bible,  Ed. 

Lon.  an.  1683. 


For  "  I  reckon" 
that  the  sufferings 
of  this  present  time, 
are  not  "  worthy  to 
be  compared  with" 
the  glory  which  shall 
be  revealed  in  us. 


Of  how  much 
"sorer  punishment," 
suppose  ye,  shall  he 
be  thought  "  wor- 
thy" who  hath  trod- 
den under-foot  the 
Son  of  God. 


Giving  thanks  un- 
to the  Father  that 
hath  made  us"meet," 
&c. 


— "  Even  unto  the 
end." 


But  we  sec  Jesus, 
who  was  made  a 
"little  lower  than" 
the  angels,  for  the 
"  suffering"  of  death 
crowned  with  glory 
and  honour. 


MERITS,    AND    MERITORIOUS    WORKS. 


(1)  I  shall  not  say  much  of  this  gross  cor- 
ruption, because  they  have  been  pleased  to  correct 
it  in  their  last  translation :  nor  will  I  dwell  on 
their  first  words,  "  I  am  certainly  persuaded," 
which  is  a  far  greater  asseveration  than  the 
apostle  uses ;  I  wonder  how  they  could  thus 
translate  that  Greek  word  hylZo/uxi ;  but  that 
they  were  resolved  nor  only  to  translate  the 
apostle's  words  falsely,  against  meritorious 
works,  but  also  to  avouch  and  affirm  the  same 
forcibly.  And  for  the  words  following,  they 
are  not  in  Greek,  as  they  translate  in  their  first 
English  Bibles,  "  the  afflictions  are  not  worthy 
of  the  glory,"  &c,  because  they  will  not  have 
our  suffering  here,  though  for  Christ's  sake,  to 
merit  eternal  glory  ;  but  thus,  "  The  afflictions 
of  this  time,  are  not  equal,  correspondent,  or 
comparable  to  the  glory  to  come,"  because  they 
are  short,  but  the  glory  is  eternal  ;  the  afflic- 
tions are  small  and  few,  in  comparison ;  the 
glory  great  and  abundant,  above  measure.  By 
this  the  apostle  would  encourage  us  to  suffer  ; 
as  he  does  also  in  another  place  very  plainly, 
when  he  says,  "  Our  tribulation  which  presently 
is  for  a  moment  and  light,  worketh  ('  prepareth,' 
says  their  Bible,  1577,  with  a  very  false  mea- 
ning) above  measure  exceedingly,  an  eternal 
weight  of  glory  in  us."  See  you  not  here,  that 
short  tribulation  in  this  life  "  works,"  that  is 
causes,  purchases,  and  deserves  an  eternal 
weight  of  glory  in  the  next  ?  And  what  is  that, 
jut  to  be  meritorious,  and  worthy  of  the  same  ? 
As  St.  Cyprian  says,  (a)  "  O  what  manner  of 
day  shall  come,  my  brethren,  when  our  Lord 
shall  recount  the  merits  of  every  one,  and  pay 
us  the  reward,  or  stipend  of  faith  and  devotion  !" 
Here  you  see  are  merits,  and  the  reward  for  the 
same.  Likewise  St.  Augustine  :  (b)  "  The  ex- 
ceeding goodness  of  God  has  provided  this, 
that  the  labours  should  soon  be  ended,  but  the 
rewards  of  the  merit  shall  endure  without  end ; 
the  apostle  testifying,  the  passions  of  this  time 
are  not  comparable,"  &c.  "  For  we  shall  re- 
ceive greater  bliss,  than  are  the  afflictions  of  all 
passions  whatsoever." 

(2)  How  deceitfully  they  deal  with  the  scripture 
in  this  place  !  One  of  their  Bibles  (c)  very  falsely 
and  corruptly  leaving  out  the  words  "  worthy 
of,"  or  "  deserve,"  saying,  "  How  much  sorer 
shall  he  be  punished  ?"  &c.  And  the  last  of 
their  translations  adding  as  falsely  to  the  text 
the  word  "  thought :"  **  How  much  sorer  pun- 
ishment shall  he  be  thought  worthy  of,"  &c.  ; 
and  this  is  done  to  avoid  this  consequence,  which 
must  have  followed  by  translating  the  Greek 
word  sincerely ;  to  wit,  if  the  Greek  here,  by 
there  own  translation,  signifies  "  to  be  worthy 
of,"  or  "  to  deserve,"  being  spoken  of  pains  or 
punishments  deserved  ;  then  must  they  grant 
us  the  same  word  to  signify  the  same  thing 
elsewhere  in  the  New  Testament,  when  it  is 
spoken  of  deserving  Heaven,  and  the  kingdom 

(a)  St.  Cyprian,  Ep.  56,  v.  3. 

(b)  St.  August.  Serm.  57,  de  Sanct. 

(c)  Bible  of  1562. 

11 


of  God,  as  in  Luke,  xx.,  xxi.,  where,  if  they 
translate  according  to  the  Greek,  which  they 
pretend  to,  they  should  say,  "  may  be  worthy," 
and  "  they  that  are  worthy  ;"  and  not  according 
to  the  Vulgate  Latin,  which  I  see,  they  are 
willing  to  follow,  when  they  think  it  may  make 
the  more  for  their  turn. 


(3)  The  Greek  word  Ixavuoui,  they  translate  to 
make  "  meet"  in  this  place,  but  in  other  places 
(viz.  Mat.  iii.  8,  11,  and  viii.  8,)  they  translate 
Ixavbg,  "  worthy."  And  why  could  they  not 
follow  the  old  Latin  interpreter  one  step  further  ? 
seeing  this  was  the  place  where  they  should  have 
showed  their  sincerity,  and  have  said,  that  God 
made  us  "  worthy"  of  heavenly  bliss  ;  because 
they  cannot  but  know,  that  if  Ixuvdg,  be  "worthy," 
then  Ixuribaon  must  needs  be  "  to  make  worthy." 
But  they  follow  their  old  master,  Beza,  (d)  who 
tells  them,  that  here,  and  there,  and  soforth, 
1  have  followed  the  old  Latin  interpreter,  trans- 
lating it  "  worthy,"  but  in  such  and  such  a  place 
(meaning  this  for  one)  I  choose  rather  to  say 
"  meet."  What  presumption  is  here  !  The 
Greek  fathers  interpret  it  "  worthy."  St.  Chry- 
sostom,  upon  this  place,  says,  (e)  "  God  doth 
not  only  give  us  society  with  the  saints,  but 
makes  us  also  worthy  to  receive  so  great  a  dig- 
nity." And  OEcumenius  says  :  that  "  it  is  God's 
glory  to  make  his  servants  worthy  of  such  good 
things  :  and  that  it  is  their  glory  to  be  made 
worthy  of   such  things."  (/) 

(4)  Here  is  yet  another  most  notorious  cor- 
ruption against  "  merits  :"  "  I  have  applied  my 
heart  to  fulfil  thy  statues,  always,  even  unto  the 
end  ;"  and  for  their  evasion  here,  they  fly  to  the 
ambiguity  of  the  Hebrew  word  Sp?>  as  if  the 
seventy  interpreters  were  not  sufficient  to  de- 
termine the  same  ;  but  because  they  find  it  am- 
biguous, they  are  resolved  to  take  their  liberty, 
though  contrary  to  St.  Hierom,  and  the  ancient 
fathers,  both  Greek  and  Latin. 

(5)  In  fine,  so  obstinately  are  they  set  against 
merits,  and  meritorious  works,  that  some  of 
them  think,  (g)  that  even  Christ  himself  did  not 
merit  his  own  glory  and  exaltation  :  for  making 
out  of  which  error,  I  suppose,  they  have  trans- 
posed the  words  of  this  text,  thereby  making 
the  apostle  say,  that  Christ  was  inferior  to 
angels  by  his  suffering  death  ;  that  is,  says  Beza, 
"  for  to  suffer  death  ;"  by  which  they  quite  ex- 
clude the  true  sense,  that,  "  for  suffering  death, 
he  was  crowned  with  glory  ;"  which  are  the 
true  words  and  meaning  of  the  apostle.  But  in 
their  last  translations  they  so  place  the  words 
that  they  will  have  it  left  so  ambiguous,  as  yoi 
may  follow  which  sense  you  will.  Intolerable 
is  their  deceit ! 


(J)  Beza  Annot.  in  Matth.  iii.  Nov.  Test.  1556. 

(e)  Oecum.  in  Caten. 

(/)  St.  Bazil.  in  Orat.  Litnr. 

(g)  See  Calvin,  in  Epist.  ad  Philip. 


78 


XIX. PROTESTANT  TRANSLATIONS  AGAINST 


The  Book, 

Chapter, 

and  Verse. 


St.  John 
chap.  i. 
verse  12. 


1  Corinth, 
chap.  xv. 
verse  10. 


Ephesians 
chap.  iii. 
verse  12. 


2  Corinth, 
chap.  vi. 
verse  1. 


Romans 
chap.  v. 
verse  6. 


1  Ep.  John 
chap.  v. 
verse  3. 


St.  Matth. 
chap.  xix. 
verse  11. 


The  Vulgate  Latin  Text. 


Quotquot  autem 
receperunt  cum,  de- 
dit  eis  " potestatem" 
cSuoluv,  jilios  Dei 
fieri.  (1) 


—  Scd  abundan- 
tius  Mis  omnibus  la- 
boravi :  non  ego  au- 
tem, sed  gratia  Dei 
"  mccum,"  i)  x&QlZ  T« 
Oeu  ))  ovv  ifxoi.  (2) 


In  quo  habemus 
•' Jiduciam"  ct  "  ac- 
cessum"  in  confiden- 
tia  per  fidem  ejus. 
(3) 


"  Adjuvantes,"  ov- 
vEoyovvTEg,autem  ex- 
hortamur,  ne  in  va- 
cuum gratiam  Dei 
recipiatis.  (4) 


TJt  quid  enim 
Christ  us,  cum  adhuc 
"  infirmi  essemus," 
ovtwv  Tjfiwv  <bodevibv: 
secundum  tempuspro 
"  impiis"  mortuus 
est.  (5) 


Hcbc  est  enim 
charitas  Dei,  ut 
mandata  ejus  custo- 
diamus :  et  mandata 
ejus  "  gravia"  non 
sunt,  ai  iiToXul  fia- 
qslui  sx  elalv.  (6) 


Qui  dixit  illis, 
"  non  omnes  capiunt, 
d  n&vreg  /htouai,  ver- 
'um  istud,  sed  qui- 
bus  datum  est.  (7) 


The  true  English  accord- 
ing to  the  Khemish 
Translation. 


But  as  many  as 
received  him,  he 
gave  them  "  power" 
to  be  made  the 
sons  of  God. 


—  But  I  have  la- 
boured more  abun- 
dantly than  all  they; 
yet  not  I,  but  the 
grace  of  God  "  with 


In  whom  we  have 
"  affiance"  and  "  ac- 
cess" in  confidence, 
by  the  faith  of  him. 


And  "  we  help- 
ing," do  exhort,  that 
you  receive  not  the 
grace  of  God  in 
vain. 


For,  why  did 
Christ,  when  we  as 
yet  "  were  weak," 
according  to  the 
time,  die  for  the 
"  impious." 


For  this  is  the 
charity  of  God,  that 
we  keep  his  com- 
mandments :  and  his 
commandments  are 
not  "  heavy." 


—  All  men  "  do 
hot"  receive  this 
saying. 


Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 
testant Bibles,  printed 
a.  d.  1562,  1577,  1579. 


But  as  many  as 
received  him,  he 
gave  them  "  prero- 
gative" ("  Dignity," 
says  Beza)  to  be  the 
sons  of  God.  (1) 


—  Yet    not  I, 

but     the    grace  of 

God     "  which  is" 
with  me.  (2) 


"  By"  whom  we 
have  "boldness"  and 
"entrance,  with  the" 
confidence  "  which 
is"  by  the  faith  of 
him  ;  or  "  in  him," 
as  Beza  has  it.  (3) 


And  wo  "  God's 
labourers,"  &c.  In 
another  Bible,  We 
"  together  are  God's 
labourers."  (4) 


Christ,  when  we 
were  yet  of  "  no 
strength,"  died  for 
the  "  ungodly."  (5) 


—  And  his  com- 
mandments are  not 
"  grievous."  (6) 


—  All  men  "  can- 
not" receive  this 
saying. (7) 


The  last  Translation  of 

the  Protestant  Bible,  Ed. 

Lon.,  an,  1683. 


Corrected. 


—  Yet  not  I,  but 
the  grace  of  God 
"  which  was"  with 
me. 


Corrected. 


Corrected. 


For  when  we 
were  yet  "  without 
strength,"  in  due 
time  Christ  died  for 
the  "  ungodly  " 


—  Instead  of,  his 
commandments  are 
not  "  heavy,"  they 
say,  are  not  "  grie- 
vous." 


—  All  men  "  can- 
not" receive  this 
saying. 


FREE    WILL. 


79 


(1)  Against  free  will,  instead  of  power, 
they,  in  their  translation,  use  the  word  preroga- 
tive ;  and  Beza,  the  word  dignity ;  protesting 
(a)  that  whereas,  in  other  places,  he  often  trans- 
lated this  Greek  word,  power  and  authority, 
here  he  jejected  both  indeed  against  free  will  ; 
which,  he  says,  the  sophists  would  prove  out  of 
this  place,  reprehending  Erasmus  for  following 
them  in  his  translation.  But  whereas  the  Greek 
word  is  indifferently  used  to  signify  dignity  or 
liberty,  he  that  will  translate  either  of  these,  and 
exclude  the  other,  restrains  the  sense  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  and  determines  it  to  his  own  fancy. 
Now  we  may  as  well  translate  liberty,  as  Beza 
does  dignity  ;  but  we  must  not  abridge  the  sense 
of  the  Holy  Ghost  to  one  particular  meaning, 
and  therefore  we  translate  potcstas  and  power, 
words  indifferently  signifying  both  dignity  and 
liberty.  But  in  their  last  Bible  it  is  corrected. 
It  would  have  been  well,  if  they  had  corrected 
this  next,  though  I  think  of  the  two,  they  have 
made  it  worse ;  translating,  "  not  I,  but  the 
grace  of  God  which  was  with  mc,"  ("  which  is 
with  me,)  say  their  old  Bibles." 

(2)  By  which  falsity,  they  here  also  restrain 
the  sense  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  whereas,  if  they 
had  translated  according  to  sincerity,  "  Yet 
not  I,  but  the  grace  of  God  with  me,"  the  text 
might  have  had  not  only  the  sense  they  confine 
it  to,  but  also  this,  "  not  I,  but  the  grace  of 
God  which  laboured  with  me."  So  that,  by  this 
latter,  it  may  be  evidently  signified,  that  the 
grace  of  God,  and  the  apostle,  both  laboured 
together  ;  and  not  only  grace,  as  if  the  apostle 
had  done  nothing,  like  unto  a  block,  or  forced 
only;  but  that  the  grace  of  God  did  so  concur, 
as  the  principal  agent,  with  all  his  labours,  that 
his  free  will  wrought  with  it  :  and  this  is  the 
most  approved  interpretation  of  this  place, 
which  their  translation,  by  putting,  "  which  is," 
or,  "  which  was,"  into  the  text,  excludes. 

But  they  reprehend  the  Vulgate  Latin  inter- 
preter for  neglecting  the  Greek  article,  not  con- 
sidering that  the  same  many  times  cannot  be 
expressed  in  Latin  ;  the  Greek  phrase  having  this 
prerogative  above  the  Latin,  to  represent  a  thing 
more  briefly,  commodiously,  and  significantly 
by  the  article,  as  Jacobus  Zr.bedmi,  Jacobus 
Alplicei,  Judas  Jacobi,  Maria  C/eophce :  in  all 
which,  though  the  Greek  article  is  not  expressed, 
yet  they  are  all  sincerely  translated  into  Latin. 
Nor  can  the  article  be  expressed  without  adding 
more  than  the  article,  and  so  not  without  adding 
to  the  text,  as  they  do  very  boldly  in  such 
speeches,  throughout  the  New  Testament. 
Yea,  they  do  it  when  there  is  no  article  in  the 
Greek,  and  that  purposely  :  as  in  this  of  the 
Ephesians,  (3)  where  they  say,  "  Confidence  is 
by  faith,"  as  though  there  were  no  "confidence  by 
works."  The  Greek,  f  v  lenoidrjosi.  dia  itj$  mqeoi;, 
bears  not  that  translation,  unless  there  were  an 
article  after  confidence,  which  is  not ;  but  they 
add  it  to  the  text :  as  also  Beza  does  the  like,  in 
Rom.  viii.  2,  and  their  English  Geneva  Testa- 

(a)  Beza  Nov.  Test  1580. 


ments  after  him,  to  maintain  the  heres)'  of  im- 
putative justice  :  as  in  his  annotations  he  plainly 
deduces,  saying  confidently,  "  I  doubt  not,  but 
a  Greek  article  must  be  understood ;"  and 
therefore,  forsooth,  put  into  the  text  also.  He 
does  the  same  in  St.  James  ii.  20,  still  debating 
the  case  in  his  annotations,  wrhy  he  does  so  ;  and 
when  he  has  concluded  in  his  fancy,  that  this  or 
that  is  the  sense,  he  puts  it  so  in  the  text,  and 
translates  accordingly.  But  if  they  say,  that  in 
this  place  of  the  Corinthians  there  is  a  Greek 
article,  and  therefore  they  do  well  to  express  it : 
I  answer,  first,  the  article  may  then  be  expressed 
in  translation,  when  there  can  be  but  one  sense 
of  the  same.  Secondly,  it  must  be  expressed, 
when  we  cannot  otherwise  give  the  sense  of  the 
place,  as  Mat.  i.  6-  sx  irjg  is  'Ovals,  Ex  ea  qua 
fuit  Uria,  where  the  Vulgate  interpreter  omits 
it  not ;  but  in  this  of  St.  Paul,  which  we  now 
speak  of,  where  the  sense  is  doubtful,  and  the 
Latin  expresses  the  Greek  sufficiently  otherwise, 
he  leaves  it  also  doubtful  and  indifferent,  not* 
abridging  it,  as  they  do,  saying,  "  the  grace  of 
God  which  is  wiih  me." 

(1)  Again,  in  this  other  place  of  the  Corin- 
thians, where  the  apostle  calls  himself  and  his 
fellow  preachers,  "  God's  co-adjutors,  co-la- 
bourers," or  such  as  labour  and  work  with  God, 
how  falsely  have  their  first  translators  made  it, 
let  themselves,  who  have  corrected  it  in  their 
last  Bible,  judge. 

(5)  And  in  this  next,  the  apostle's  words  do 
not  signify,  that  "  we  had  no  strength,"  or, 
"  were  without  strength ;"  but  that  we  were 
"  weak,  feeble,  infirm  :"  and  this  they  corrupt  to 
defend  their  false  doctrine,  "  that  free  will  was 
altogether  lost  by  Adam's  sin."  (b)  (c) 

(6)  When  they  have  bereaved  and  spoiled  a 
man  of  his  free-will,  and  left  him  without  all 
strength,  they  go  so  far  in  this  point,  that  they 
say,  the  regenerate  themselves  have  no  free  -will 
and  ability  ;  no,  not  by  and  with  the  grace  of 
God,  to  keep  the  commandment.  To  this  pur- 
pose, they  translate,  his  commandments  are  not 
"  grievous,"  rather  than  "  are  not  heavy  ;"  for 
in  saying,  "  they  are  not  heavy,"  it  would  follow, 
they  might  be  kept  and  observed  ;  but  in  saying 
"  they  are  not  grievous,"  that  may  be  true,  were 
they  never  so  heavy  or  impossible,  through  pa- 
tience ;  as  when  a  man  cannot  do  as  he  would  ; 
yet  it  grieves  him  not,  being  patient  and  wise, 
because  he  is  content  to  do  as  he  can,  and  is 
able. 

(7)  Our  Saviour  says  not  in  this  place  of  St. 
Matthew,  as  they  falsely  translate,  "  All  men 
cannot,"  but,  "  All  men  do  not ;"  and  therefore, 
St.  Augustine  says,  "  Because  all  will  not."  (J) 
But  when  our  Saviour  says  afterwards,  "  He 
that  can  receive,  let  him  receive  :"  he  adds 
another  Greek  word  to  express  that  sense, 
6  dwauEvog  xwoetv  xcogsiTw  whereas  by  the  Pro- 
testant translation,  he  might  have  said,  6  xmqmv 
Xuqeitci).     Vide  above. 

(b)  Whitaker,  p.  18. 

(c)  See  Beza's  Annot,  in  Rom.  ii.  27. 

(d)  St.  August,  de  Gra.  et  lib.  Arbitr.  cap.  4. 


BO 


XX. PROTESTANT  TRANSLATIONS  AGAINST 


The  Book, 

Chapter, 

and  Verse. 


The  Vulgate  Latin  Text. 


The  true  English  accord- 
ing to  the  Rhemish 
Translation. 


Corruptions  in  the  Pro 
testant  Bibles,  printed 
A.  d.  1562,  1577,  1573. 


The  last    Translation  of 

the  Protestant  Bible,  Ed. 

Lon.  an.  1683. 


Romans 
chap.  v. 
verse  18. 


Romans 
chap.  iv. 
verse  3. 


2  Corinth, 
chap.  v. 
ver.  ult. 


Ephesians 
chap.  i. 
verse  6. 


Daniel 
chap.  vi. 
verse  22. 


Romans 
chap.  iv. 
verse  6. 


"  Tgitur"  sicut  per 
unius  delictum  in 
omnes  homines  in 
condemnationsrn :  sic 
etptr  unius  juslitium 
in  omnes  homines  in 
just.fcationem  vitce. 
(1) 


Credidit  Abraham 
Deo,  et  reputatum 
est  Mi  "adjustitiam" 
eig  SixuioovvTjv.  (2) 


—  Ut  nos  effice- 
remur  "justitia"  Dei 
ipso,  Sutaioavvrj  Qeu 
sv  at/io).  (3) 


In  qua  "  gratifi- 
cavit,exotQiTcoasv,  nos 
in  dilecto  filio   suo. 


— Quia  coram  co 
"justitia  inventa  est 
in  me."  (5) 


Sicut  et  David 
dicit,  i-sysl,  beatitu- 
dinem  hominis  cui 
Dcus  accepto  fert 
justitiam  sine  operi- 
bus,  (6) 


Therefore,  as  by 
the  offence  of  one, 
unto  all  men  to  con- 
demnation :  so  also 
by  the  "justice"  of 
one,  unto  all  men  to 
justification  of  life. 


Abraham  believed 
God,  and  it  was  re- 
puted him  "  to  jus- 
tice." 


—  That  we  might 
be  made  the  "jus- 
tice" of  God  in  him. 


Wherein  he  hath 
"  gratified  us"  in  his 
beloved  Son. 


—  Because  before 
him  "justice  was 
found  in  me." 


As  David  also 
"termeth"  the  bless- 
edness of  a  man,  "to 
whom"  God  "  repu- 
teth  justice"  with 
out  works. 


"  Likewise  then," 
as  by  the  offence  of 
one,  "  the  fault 
came  on"  all  men 
to  condemnation :  so 
by  the  "  justifying" 
of  one  "  the  benefit 
aboundeth  towards" 
all  men,  to  "  the" 
justification  of  life. 
(1) 


Abraham  believed 
God,  and  it  was  re- 
puted to  him  "  for 
justice."  (2) 


That  we  "  by  his 
means"  should  be 
"  that  righteousness 
which  before"  God 
"  is  allowed."  (3) 


Wherein  he  hath 
"made  us  accepted," 
(or  "  freely  accep- 
ted") in  his  beloved 
Son.  (4) 


Because  before 
him,  "  my  justice 
was  found  out."  (5) 


As  David  "  de- 
scribeth"  the  bless- 
edness of  "the"  man, 
"unto  whom"  God 
"  imputeth  righte- 
ousness." (6) 


Therefore,  as  by 
the  offences  of  one, 
"judgment  came  up- 
on" all  men  to  con- 
demnation :  even  so 
by  the  "  righteous- 
ness of  of  one,"the 
free  gift  came  upon" 
all  men  unto  justifi- 
cation of  life. 


And  it  was  ac- 
counted unto  him 
"for  righteousness." 


That  we  might  be 
made  the  "  righte- 
ousness" of  God  in 
him. 


Wherein  he  hath 
made  us  "accepted" 
in  the  Beloved. 


Forasmuch  as  be- 
fore him"innocency 
was  found  in  me." 


Instead  of  "  ter- 
meth" they  say,"de- 
scribeth ;"  and  for 
justice,"  they  have 
"  righteousness." 


IXIIEREXT  JUSTICE. 


81 


(1)  Beza,  in  his  annotations  on  Rom.  v.  18, 
protests,  that  his  adding  to  this  text  is  especially 
against  inherent  justice,  which,  he  says,  is  to  be 
avoided  as  nothing  more.  His  false  translation 
you  see  our  English  Bibles  follow  ;  and  have 
added  no  fewer  than  six  words  in  this  one  verse  ; 
yea,  their  last  translations  have  added  seven,  and 
some  of  these  words  much  different  from  those 
of  their  former  brethren  ;  so  that  it  is  impossible 
to  make  them  agree  betwixt  themselves.  I 
cannot  but  admire  to  see  how  loath  they  are  to 
suffer  the  holy  scripture  to  speak  in  behalf  of 
inherent  justice. 


(2)  So  also  in  this  next  place,  where  they  add 
the  word  "  for"  to  the  text,  "  and  it  was  reputed 
to  him  for  justice,"  for  "  righteousness,"  says 
their  last  righteous  work ;  for  the  longer  they 
live,  the  further  they  are  divided  from  justice  ; 
because  they  would  have  it  to  be  nothing  else, 
but  instead  and  place  of  justice  :  thereby  taking 
away  true  inherent  justice,  even  in  Abraham 
himself.  But  admit  this  translation  of  theirs, 
which,  notwithstanding  in  their  sense,  is  false, 
must  it  needs  signify  not  true  inherent  justice, 
because  the  scripture  says,  it  was  reputed  for 
justice  ?  Do  such  speeches  import,  that  it  is  not  so 
indeed,  but  is  only  reputed  so?  Then  if  we  should 
say,  this  shall  be  reputed  to  thee  "  for"  sin,  "for" 
a  great  benefit,  &c,  it  should  signify  it  is  no  sin 
indeed,  nor  great  benefit.  But  let  them  remem- 
ber, that  the  scripture  uses  to  speak  of  sin  and 
of  justice  alike,  reputabitur  tibi  in  peccatum, 
"  It  shall  be  reputed  to  thee  for  sin,"  as  St. 
Hierom  translates  it.  (a)  If  then  justice  only 
be  reputed,  sin  also  is  only  reputed  :  if  sin  be  in 
us  indeed,  justice  is  in  us  indeed.  And  the 
Greek  fathers  make  it  plain,  that  "  to  be  re- 
puted unto  justice,"  is  to  have  true  justice  indeed  ; 
interpreting  St.  Paul's  words,  that  "  Abraham 
obtained  justice,"  "  Abraham  was  justified  ;"  for 
that  is,  say  they,  "  It  was  reputed  him  to  justice." 
And  St.  James  testifies,  that  "  In  that  Abraham 
was  justified  by  faith  and  works,  the  scripture 
was  fulfilled,"  which  says,  "  It  was  reputed  him 
to  justice,"  Gen.  xv.  6,  in  which  words  of 
Genesis  there  is  not  "  for  justice,"  or  "  instead 
of  justice,"  as  the  English  Bibles  have  it,  for  the 
Hebrew  np-&  "6  mom  should  not  be  so  trans- 
lated, especially  when  they  meant  it  was  so 
counted  or  reputed  for  justice,  that  it  was  not 
justice  indeed. 


(3)  Again,  how  intolerably  have  their  first 
translations  corrupted  St.  Paul's  words,  2 
Cor.  v.,  which  though  their  latter  Bibles  have 
undertaken  to  correct,  yet  their  heresy  would 
not    suffer    them    to    amend    also     the    word 


(a)  Deut,  xxiii.  andxxiv.;  CEcum.  in  Caten.  Photius, 
chap.  ii.  ver.  23. 


"  righteousness !"  It  is  death  to  them  to  hear 
of  justice. 


(4)  Here  again  they  make  St.  Paul  say,  that 
God  made  us  "  accepted,"  or  "  freely  accepted  in 
his  beloved  Son,"  (their  last  translation  leaves  out 
Son  very  boldly,  changing  the  word  his  into  the, 
"  accepted  in  the  Beloved,")  as  if  they  had  a  mind 
to  say,  that  "  in,  or  among  all  the  beloved  in 
the  world,  God  has  only  accepted  us  :"  as  they 
make  the  angel  in  St.  Luke  say  to  our  blessed 
Lady,  "  Hail !  freely  beloved,"  to  take  away  all 
grace  inherit  and  resident  in  the  blessed  Virgin, 
or  in  us  :  whereas  the  apostle's  word  signifies 
that  we  are  truly  made  grateful,  or  gracious  and 
acceptable  ;  that  is  to  say,  that  our  soul  is 
inwardly  endued  and  beautified  with  grace,  and 
the  virtues  proceeding  from  it ;  and  conse- 
quently, is  holy  indeed  before  the  sight  of  God, 
and  not  only  so  accepted  or  reputed,  as  they 
imagine.  Which  St.  Chrysostom  sufficiently 
testifies  in  these  words  :  "  He  said  not,  which  he 
freely  gave  us,  but,  wherein  he  made  us  grate- 
ful ;  that  is,  not  only  delivered  us  from  sins,  but 
also  made  us  beloved  and  amiable,  made  our 
soul  beautiful  and  grateful,  such  as  the  angels 
and  archangels  desire  to  see,  and  such  as  him- 
self is  in  love  withal,  according  to  that  in  the 
Psalm,  the  king  shall  desire  or  be  in  love  with 
thy  beauty."  (b)  St.  Hierom  speaking  of  bap- 
tism, says  :  "  Now  thou  art  made  clean  in  the 
layer  :  and  of  thee  it  is  said,  who  is  she  that 
ascends  white  1  and  let  her  be  washed,  yet  she 
cannot  keep  her  purity,  unless  she  be  strength- 
ened from  our  Lord  ;"  (c)  whence  it  is  plain, 
that  by  baptism  original  sin  being  expelled,  in- 
herent justice  takes  place  in  the  soul,  rendering 
it  clean,  white,  and  pure  ;  which  purity  the  soul, 
strengthened  by  God's  grace,  may  keep  and 
conserve. 


(5)  Another  falsification  they  make  here  in 
Daniel,  translating  :  "My  justice  was  found  out ;" 
and  in  another  Bible,  "  My  unguiltiness  was 
found  out,"  to  draw  it  from  inherent  justice, 
which  was  in  Daniel.  In  their  last  edition  you 
see  they  are  resolved  to  correct  their  brethren's 
fault;  notwithstanding  though  they  mend  one, 
yet  they  make  another ;  putting  innocency  in- 
stead of  justice.  It  is  very  strange  that  our 
English  Protestant  divines  should  have  such  a 
pique  against  justice,  that  they  cannot  endure 
to  see  it  stand  in  the  text,  where  the  Chaldee, 
Greek,  and  Latin  place  it. 


(6)  It  must  needs  be  a  spot  of  the  same 
infection,  that  they  translate  "  describeth"  here  ; 
as  though  imputed  righteousness  (for  so  they  had 
rather  say,  than  justice)  were  the  description  of 
blessedness. 


(6)  St.  Chrys.  in  this  place  of  the  Ephesians. 
(c)  St.  Hierom.,  lib.  3,  contra  Pelagianos. 


82 


XXI. PROTESTANT  TRANSLATIONS  IN 


The  Book, 

Chapter, 

and  Verse. 


Hebrews 
chap.  x. 
verse  22. 


1  Corinth, 
chap.  xiii. 
verse  2. 


1  Corinth. 
chap.  xii. 
verse  31, 


St.  James 
chap.  ii. 
verse  22. 


St.  Luke 
chap,  xviii. 
verse  42. 


St.  Mark 
chap.  x. 
verse  52, 
and 

chap.  viii. 
verse  48. 


The  Vulgate  Latin  Text. 


"  Accedamus"  cum 
vero  corde  in"pleni- 
tudine"  fidei,  ix  nlrj- 


Et  si  habuero 
"omnem"  naaav,fi. 
dem,  ita  ut  monies 
transferam  charita- 
tem  autem  non  ha- 
buero,nihil  sum.  (2) 


Et  adhuc  "  exccl- 
lentiorem  viam"  vo- 
bis  demonstro. 


Vides  quoniam 
fides  "  co-operaba- 
tur,"  ow^oyet,  operi- 
bus  illius.  (3) 


Et  Jesus  dixit 
Mi,  respice,  fides 
tua  te  "  salvum  fe- 
cit," ■§  nlgig  ad  asam- 
xi  ae.  (4) 


Vade, fides  tua  "te 
salvum  fecit." 


The  true  English  accord- 
ing to  the  Rhemish 
Translation. 


Let  us  "approach" 
with  a  true  heart,  in 
"  fulness"  of  faith. 


And  if  I  should 
have  "  all"  faith,  so 
that  I  could  remove 
mountains,and  have 
not  charity,  I  am 
nothing. 


And  yet  I  show 
you  a  "  more  excel- 
lent way." 


Seest  thou  that  faith 
"  did  work  with"  his 
works. 


—  Thy  faith  hath 
"  made  thee  whole." 


—  Thy  faith  hath 
"  made  thee  safe." 


Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 
testant Bibles,  printed 
A.  D.  1562,  1577,  1579. 


Let  us  "  draw 
nigh"  with  a  true 
heart,  in  "  assu- 
rance" of  faith.  (1) 


If  I  should  have 
"whole"  faith.  "To- 
tam  fidem "  saith 
Beza,  for  "  omnem 
fidem."  (2) 


Beza,  in  Testa- 
ment, 1556,  trans- 
lates it :  "  Behold, 
moreover  also,"  I 
show  you  a  way 
"  most  diligently." 
And  in  another,  viz., 
of  1565:  And  "be- 
sides," 1  show  you  a 
way"to  excellency." 


Thou  seest  that 
faith  "  was  a  helper 
of"  his  works. — 
Beza.  (3) 


—  Thy  faith  hath 
"  saved  thee."  (4) 


—  Thy  faith  hath 
"  saved  thee." 


The  last  Translation   of 

the  Protestant  Bible,  Ed. 

Lon.,  an.  1683. 


Let  us  "  draw 
near"  with  a  true 
heart,  in  "  full  as- 
surance" of  faith. 


"All"  faith. 


• 


Corrected. 


Corrected. 


—  Thy  faith  hath 
"  saved  thee." 


Corrected. 


DEFENCE    OF    THE    SUFFICIENCY    OF    FAITH    ALONE. 


83 


All  other  means  of  salvation  being  thus  taken 
away,  as  you  have  already  seen,  their  only  and 
last  refuge  is  faith  alone  :  and  that  not  the 
Christian  faith  contained  in  the  articles  of  the 
creed,  and  such  like  ;  but  a  special  faith  and  con- 
fidence, whereby  every  man  must  assuredly 
believe,  that  himself  is  the  son  of  God,  and  one 
of  the  elect  predestined  to  salvation.  If  he  be 
not,  by  faith,  as  sure  of  this,  as  of  Christ's  incar- 
nation and  death,  he  shall  never  be  saved. 

(1)  For  maintaining  this  heresy,  they  force 
the  Greek  text  to  express  the  very  word  of 
assurance  and  certainty  thus  :  "  Let  us  draw 
high  with  a  true  heart,  in  assurance  of  faith  :" 
their  last  translation  makes  it,  "  in  full  assurance 
of  faith  ;"  adding  the  word  full  to  what  it  was 
before ;  and  that,  either  because  they  would  be 
thought  to  draw  that  word  from  the  original,  or 
else  because  they  would  thereby  signify  such  an 
assurance  or  certainty,  as  should  be  beyond  all 
manner  of  doubt  or  fear  ;  thereby  excluding  not 
only  charity,  but  even  hope  also,  as  unneces- 
sary. 

(2)  The  word  in  the  Greek  is  far  different 
from  their  expression  ;  for  it  signifies,  properly, 
the  fulness  and  completion  of  any  thing  ;  and 
therefore,  the  apostle  joins  it  sometimes  with 
faith,  sometimes  with  hope,  (as  in  Heb.  vi.  II,) 
sometimes  with  knowledge  or  understanding, 
(Col.  ii.  2,)  to  signify  the  fulness  of  all  three,  as 
the  Vulgate  Latin  interpreter  most  sincerely 
(Rom.  iv.  21,)  translates  it.  Thus  when  the 
Greek  signifies  "  fulness  of  faith,"  rather  than 
"  full  assurance,"  (or,  as  Beza  has  it,  "  certain 
persuasion,")  "  of  faith  ;"  they  err  in  the  precise 
translation  of  it ;  and  much  more  do  they  err  in 
the  sense  when  they  apply  it  to  the  "  certain  " 
and  "  assured  faith,"  that  every  man  ought  to 
have,  as  they  say,  of  his  own  salvation.  Whereas 
the  Greek  fathers  expound  it  of  the  "  fulness  of 
faith,"  that  every  faithful  man  must  have  all  such 
things  in  heaven,  as  he  sees  not ;  namely,  that 
Christ  is  ascended  thither,  that  he  shall  come 
with  glory  to  judge  the  world,  &c,  (a)  adding 
further,  and  proving  out  of  the  apostle's  words 
next  following,  that  (the  Protestants)  "  only 
faith  is  not  sufficient,  be  it  ever  so  special  or 
assured. "(6)  For  the  said  reason  do  they 
also  translate,  "  The  special  gift  of  faith,"  (Sap. 
iii.  14,)  instead  of  "  The  chosen  gift  of  faith." 
Another  gross  corruption  they  have  in  Ecclesi- 
asticus,  v.  5.  But  because,  in  their  Bibles  of 
the  later  stamp,  they  have  rejected  these  books, 
as  not  canonical,  though  they  can  show  us  no 
more  reason  or  authority  for  their  so  doing,  than 
for  altering  and  corrupting  the  text,  I  shall  be 
content  to  pass  it  by. 

(3)  Beza,  by  corrupting  this  place  of  the 
Corinthians,  translating  totam  Jidem  for  omnem 


(a)  St.  Chrysost.,Theodoret.,Theophyl.  upon  Rom.  x. 

(b)  St.  Chrysost.,  Horn.  19,  c.  10,  ad  Heb. 


Jidem,  thinks  to  exempt  from  the  apostle's  words, 
their  special  justifying  faith  ;  whereas  it  may  be 
easily  seen,  that  St.  Paul  names  and  means 
"  all  faith,"  as  he  doth  "  all  knowledge,"  and 
"  all  mysteries,"  in  the  foregoing  words.  And 
Luther  confesses,  that  he  thrust  the  word 
"  only,"  (only  faith)  into  the  text.(c) 

(4)  Also  by  his  falsifying  this  text  of  St. 
James,  he  would  hafe  his  reader  think,  as  he 
also  expounds  it,  "  That  faith  was  an  efficient 
cause,  and  fruitful  of  good  works  ;"  whereas  the 
apostle's  words  are  plain,  that  faith  wrought 
together  with  his  works  ;  yea,  and  that  his  faith 
was  by  works  made  perfect.  This  is  an  impu- 
dent handling  of  scripture,  to  make  works  the 
fruit  only,  and  effect  of  faith  ;  which  is  their 
heresy. 


(5)  Again,  in  all  those  places  of  the  Gospel, 
where  our  blessed  Saviour  requires  the  people's 
faith,  when  he  healed  them  of  corporal  diseases 
only,  they  gladly  translate,  "  Thy  faith  hath 
saved  thee,"  rather  than,  "  Thy  faith  hath  healed 
thee,"  or,  "  Thy  faith  hath  made  thee  whole." 
And  this  they  do,  that  by  joining  these  words 
together,  they  may  make  it  sound  in  the  ears  of 
the  people,  that  faith  saves  and  justifies  a  man  : 
for  so  Beza  notes  in  the  margin,  fides  salvat, 
"  faith  saveth  ;"  whereas  the  faith  that  was  here 
required,  was  of  Christ's  power  and  omnipotence 
only  ;  which,  as  Beza  confesses,  may  be  pos- 
sessed by  the  devils  themselves  ;  and  is  far  from 
the  faith  that  justifies. (d) 


But  they  will  say,  the  Greek  signifies  as  they 
translate  it :  I  grant  it  does  so ;  but  it  signi- 
fies very  commonly  to  be  healed  corporally,  as, 
by  their  own  translation,  in  these  places,  Mark 
v.  26  ;  Luke  viii.  36, 48,  50  ;  and  in  other  places, 
where  they  translate,  "  I  shall  be  whole,"  "  they 
were  healed  ;"  "  he  was  healed  ;"  "  she  shall  be 
made  whole."  And  why  do  they  here  translate 
it  so  ?  Because  they  know,  "  to  be  saved," 
imports  rather  the  salvation  of  the  soul :  and 
therefore,  when  faith  is  joined  with  it,  they 
translate  it  rather  "saved"  than  "healed,"  to 
insinuate  their  justification  by  "  faith  only." 

But  how  contrary  to  the  doctrine  of  the 
ancient  fathers  this  Protestant  error  of "  faith 
alone  justifying"  is,  may  be  seen  by  those  who 
please  to  read  St.  Augustine,  De  Fide  el  Opere, 
c.  14. 

To  conclude,  I  will  refer  my  Protestant 
SoLiFiDiANto  the  words  of  St.  James  the  apos- 
tle ;  where  he  will  find,  that  faith  alone,  without 
works,  cannot  save  him. 


(c)  Luth.,  torn.  2,  fol  405,  edit.  Witte.,  anno  1551. 
(/)  Beza  Annot.  in  1  Cor.  xiii. 2. 


84 


XXII. PROTESTANT  TRANSLATIONS  AGAINST 


The  Book, 

Chapter, 

and  Verse. 


2  Thessal. 
chap.  ii. 
verse  15. 


2  Thessal. 
chap.  iii. 
verse  6. 


I  Corinth, 
chap.  xi. 
verse  2. 


Coloss. 
chap.  ii. 
verse  20. 


1  Peter 
chap.  i. 
verse  18 


The  Vulgate  Latin  Text. 


Itaque  fratres, 
state  et  tenete  "  tra- 
ditiones"rtuQixdoaeig, 
quas  didicistis,  sive 
per  sermonem,  sive 
per  epistolam  nos- 
tram.  (1) 


—  Vt  subtraliatis 
vos  ab  omni  fratre 
ambulante  inordi- 
nate, et  non  secun- 
dum "  tradilionem," 
quam  acceperunt  a 
nobis. 


Laudo  autem  vos 
fratres,  quod  per 
omnia  mei  memores 
estis,  et  sicut  "  tra- 
didi"  vobis,prcEcepta 
mea  tenclis,  xadwg 
naQsdoxa,  jag  naqa- 
Soaeig  xoctsxets. 


Si  ergo  mortui  estis 
cum  Christo  ab  "  ele- 
mentis^hujus  tnundi: 
quid  adhuc  tanquam 
viventes  in  mundo  de- 
cernitis  1  n  doyfiaji- 
Zsods.  (2) 


Scientes  quod  non 
corruptibilibus  auro 
vel  argento  redempti 
estis  de  vana  vestra 
conversatione  "  pa-. 
terncB  traditionis"  ix 
ji]g  /LtuTixiag  ifiwv 
avac,Qoq>i}g  nctiQorru- 
QCtdoTU.   (3) 


The  true  English  accord- 
ing to  the  Rhemish 
Translation. 


Therefore,  bre- 
thren, stand  and 
hold  the  "  tradi- 
tions" which  you 
have  learned,  whe- 
ther it  be  by  word, 
or  by  our  epistle. 


— That  you  with- 
draw 3Tourselves 
from  every  brother 
walking  inordinate- 
ly, and  not  accord- 
ing to  the  "  tradi- 
tions" which  they 
have  received  of  us. 


And  I  praise  you 
brethren,  that  in  all 
things  you  be  mind- 
ful of  ine,  and  as  I 
have  "  delivered" 
unto  you,  you  keep 
my  "  precepts." 


If  then  you  be 
dead  with  Christ 
from  the  "elements" 
of  this  world,  why 
do  you  yet  "decree" 
as  living  in  the 
world  ? 


Knowing  that  not 
with  corruptible 
things,  gold  or  sil- 
ver, you  are  re- 
deemed from  your 
vain  conversation  of 
"  your  fathers'  tradi- 
tion." 


Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 
testant Bibles,  printed 
a.  D.  1562,  3577,  1579. 


For  "  traditions," 
they  say  "  ordinan- 
ces.'^!) 


Instead  of  "  tradi- 
tions," they  trans- 
late, "  instructions." 


— And  "  keep  the 
ordinances,"  as  I 
have  "  preached" 
unto  you. 


If  "  ye"  be  dead 
with  Christ  from 
the  "  rudiments"  of 
"  the"  world,  why, 
"  as  though"  living 
in  the  world,  "  are 
ye  led  with  tradi- 
tions ?"  And,  "  are 
ye  burthened  with 
traditions?"  (2) 


"  You  were"  not 
redeemed  with  cor- 
ruptible things,  gold 
or  silver,  from  your 
vain  conversation 
"  received  by  the" 
tradition  of  the"  fa- 
thers. (3) 


The  last  Translation  of 

the  Protestant  Bible,  Ed. 

L6n.,  an.  1683. 


Corrected. 


Corrected 


—  And  keep  the 
"  ordinances,"  as  I 
have  delivered  them 
to  you. 


— Why,  as  though 
living  in  the  world, 
are  you  "  subject  to 
ordinances  ?" 


—  From  your 
vain  conversation 
"  received  by  tradi . 
tion  from  your  fa 
thers." 


APOSTOLICAL    TRADITIONS. 


85 


A  general  mark,  wherewith  all  heretics  that 
have  ever  disturbed  God's  church  have  been 
branded,  is,  "  to  reject  apostolical  traditions," 
and  to  fly  to  the  scripture,  as  by  themselves  ex- 
pounded, for  their  "  only  rule  of  faith"  We 
read  not  of  any  heresy  since  the  apostles'  time, 
on  which  this  character  has  been  more  deeply 
stamped,  than  in  those  of  this  last  age,  especially 
the  first  heads  of  them,  and  those  who  were  the 
interpreters  and  translators  of  the  scriptures ; 
whom  we  find  to  have  been  possessed  with  such 
prejudice  against  apostolical  tradition,  that 
wheresoever  the  holy  scripture  speaks  against 
certain  traditions  of  the  Jews,  there  all  the  Eng- 
lish translations  follow  the  Greek  exactly,  never 
omitting  to  translate  the  Greek  word  nuqudooi;, 
"  tradition."  On  the  contrary,  wheresoever  the 
sacred  text  speaks  in  commendation  of  tradi- 
tions, to  wit,  such  traditions  as  the  apostles  de- 
livered to  the  church,  there  (1)  all  their  first 
translations  agree  not  to  follow  the  Greek, 
which  is  still  the  self-same  word  ;  but  for  tradi- 
tions, use  the  words  ordinances  or  instructions, 
preachings,  institutions,  and  any  word  else, 
rather  than  traditions :  insomuch,  that  Beza, 
the  master  of  our  English  scripturists,  translates 
the  word  7i(xQO)d6aeig,  traditam  doctrinam,  "  the 
doctrine  delivered,"  putting  the  singular  number 
for  the  plural,  and  adding  "  doctrine"  of  his  own 
accord,   (a) 


Who  could  imagine  their  malice  and  partiality 
against  traditions  to  be  so  great,  that  they  should 
all  agree,  in  their  first  translations  I  mean  ; 
for  they  could  not  but  blush  at  it  in  their  last, 
with  one  consent  so  duly  and  exactly,  in  all 
these  places  set  down  in  the  former  page,  to 
conceal  and  suppress  the  word  tradition,  which, 
in  other  places,  they  so  gladly  make  use  of?  I 
appeal  to  their  consciences,  whether  these  things 
were  not  done  on  purpose,  and  with  a  very 
wicked  intention,  to  signify  to  the  reader,  that  all 
traditions  are  to  be  reproved  and  rejected,  and 
none  allowed. 


(2)  In  some  places  they  do  so  gladly  use  this 
word  tradition,  that  rather  than  want  it,  they 
make  bold  to  thrust  it  into  the  text,  when  it  is 
not  in  the  Greek  at  all ;  as  you  see  in  this  place 
of  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians,  (b)  "  Why,  as 
though  living  in  the  world,  are  you  led  with 
traditions  ?"  And  as  another  English  Bible  reads 
mere  heretically,  "  Why  are  ye  burthened  with 
traditions  ?"  Doubtless,  they  knew  as  well  then, 
as  they  do  now  at  this  day,  that  this  Greek  word 
Soyfiu,  doth  not  signify  tradition  ;  yea,  they  were 
not  ignorant,  when  a  little  before,  in  the  same 


(a)  2  Thes.  ii.  3. 

(b)  Bib.  1579. 


12 


1  chapter,  and  in  other  places,  themselves  trans- 
late doyuaia,  "  ordinances,"  "  decrees."  (c) 
Was  not  this  done  then  to  make  the  very  name 
of  tradition  odious  among  the  people  1 


And  though  some  of  these  gross  corruptions 
are  corrected  by  their  last  translators,  yet  we 
have  no  reason  to  think  they  were  amended  out 
of  any  good  or  pure  intention,  but  rather  to  de- 
fend some  of  their  own  traditions,  viz.,  wearing 
of  the  rocket,  surplice,  four-cornered  cap,  keep- 
ing the  first  day  in  the  week  Loly,  baptizing  in- 
fants, &c,  all  which  things  being  denied  by 
their  more  refined  brethren,  as  not  being  clearly 
to  be  proved  out  of  scripture,  and  they  having 
no  other  refuge  to  fly  to  but  tradition,  were  forced 
to  translate  tradition  in  some  places,  where  it  is 
well  spoken  of.  But,  I  say,  this  could  not 
be  from  any  pure  intention  of  correcting  their 
corrupted  scripture ;  but  rather  for  the  said  self- 
end  ;  which  appears  evidently  enough  from 
their  not  also  correcting  other  notorious  falsifi- 
cations, (as  1  Pet.  i.  18,)  (3)  "  You  were  not  re- 
deemed with  corruptible  things,  from  your  vain 
conversation  received  by  tradition  from  your 
fathers  ;'■'  where  the  Greek  in  tTjj  juaxala;  ifttov 
uiutgooyrig  TuiTQonaQodoiH,  is  rather  to  be  thus 
translated,  and  it  is  the  Greek  they  pretend  to 
follow,  and  not  our  Vulgate  Latin  which  they 
condemn  :  "  From  your  vain  conversation  de- 
livered by  the  fathers  ;"  but  because  it  sounds 
with  the  simple  people,  to  be  spoken  against  the 
traditions  of  the  Roman  Church,  jhey  were  as 
glad  to  suffer  it  to  pass,  as  the  lormer  translators 
were,  for  the  same  reason,  to  foist  in  the  word 
tradition  ;  and  for  delivered,  to  say  received.  I 
say,  because  it  is  the  phrase  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  that  it  has  received  many  things  by 
tradition,  which  they  would  here  control  by  like- 
ness of  words,  in  their  false  translations.  But 
concerning  the  word  tradition,  they  will  tell  us 
perhaps,  the  sense  thereof  is  included  in  the 
Greek  word,  delivered.  We  grant  it:  bu* 
would  they  be  content,  if  we  should  always  ex- 
pressly add  tradition,  where  it  is  so  included  ? 
Then  should  we  say  in  the  Corir.'hians, "  I  praise 
you,  that  as  I  have  delivered  to  you,  by  tradition, 
you  keep  my  precepts  or  traditions."  And  again, 
"  For  I  received  of  our  Lord,  which  also  I  de- 
livered unto  you,  by  tradition."  (d)  And  in 
another  place,  "  As  they,  by  tradition,  delivered 
unto  us,  which  from  the  beginning  saw,"  &c, 
and  such  like,  by  their  example,  we  should 
translate  in  this  sort.  But  we  us>;  not  this  licen- 
tious manner  in  translating  the  holy  scriptures  ; 
neither  is  it  a  translator's  part,  but  an  interpre- 
ter's, and  his  that  makes  a  commentary  :  nor 
does  a  good  cause  need  any  other  translation 
than  the  express  text  of  the  scripture. 


(c)  Col.  ii.  14  ;  Eph.  ii.  15. 
{d)  1  Cor.  xi.  2,  23  ;  Luke  i.  2. 


86 


PROTESTANT    TRANSLATIONS    AGAINST    APOSTOLICAL    TRADITIONS. 


But  if  you  say,  (a)  that  our  Vulgate  Latin 
has,  in  this  place,  the  word  tradition  ;  we  grant 
it  has  so,  and  therefore,  we  also  translate  accor- 
dingly :  but  you,  as  I  hinted  above,  profess  to 
translate  the  Greek,  and  not  our  Vulgate  Latin, 
which  you  condemn  as  papistical,  and  say  it  is 
the  worst  of  all,  though  Beza,  your  master, 
pronounces  it  to  be  the  best,  (b)  And  will  you, 
notwithstanding,  follow  the  said  Vulgate  Latin, 
rather  than  the  Greek,  when  you  find  it  seems 
to  make  for  your  purpose  ?  This  is  your  par- 
tiality and  inconstancy.  One  while  you  will 
follow  it,  though  it  differ  from  the  Greek  ;  and 
another  time  you  reject  it,  though  it  agree  with 
the  Greek  most  exactly  ;  as  we  have  shown  you 
above,  (Col.  ii.  20,)  where  the  Vulgate  Latin 
hath  nothing  of  traditions,  but,  quid  decernitis,  as 
it,  is  in  the  Greek  ;  yet  there  your  sincere  breth- 
ren translate :  "  Why  are  ye  burthened  with 
traditions  ?" 


Is  not  all  this  to  bolster  up  their  errors  and 
heresies,  without  sincerely  following  either  the 
Greek  or  Latin  1  The  Greek,  at  least,  why  do 
they  not  follow?  Doth  the  Greek  nagoid'joeig, 
induce  them  to  say,  ordinances  for  traditions  ? 
Or  ddyfiuTu  lead  them  to  say,  traditions  for  de- 
crees 1  Or  dtxouw/uotTa,  nQeoflvTSQog,  udrjg,  ei'dwloi1, 
&c,  force  them  to  translate  ordinances  for  jus- 
tifications, elder  for  priest,  grave  for  hell,  image 
for  idol,  &c.  ?  No  !  Where  they  are  afraid  of 
being  disadvantageous  to  their  heresies,  they 
scruple  not  to  reject  and  forsake  both  the  Greek 
and  Latin. 


Though  Protestants,  in  their  last  translation  of 
the  Bible,  have  indeed  corrected  this  error  in 
several  places,  not  in  all,  on  purpose,  thereby  to 
defend  themselves  against  their  Puritanical  bre- 
thren, when  they  charge  them  with  several  Po- 
pish observances,  ceremonies,  and  traditions, 
which  they  cannot  maintain  by  scripture  alone, 
without  being  forced,  as  is  said,  to  fly  to  unwrit- 
ten traditions  :  yet,  when  they  either  dispute 
with,  or  write  against  Catholics,  they  utterly 
deny  traditions,  and  stick  fast  to  the  scripture 
alone,  for  their  "  only  rule  of  faith  :"  falsely 
asserting,  that  the  scripture  was  received  by  the 
primitive  church  as  a  "  perfect  rule  of  faith." 


These  are  the  words  of  a  late  ministerial  (c) 
guide  of  the  Church  of  England,  "  The  scrip- 
ture was  yet  (viz.,  when  St.  Augustine  was  sent 


(a)  Discovery  of  the  Rock,  p.  147. 

(b)  Beza,  Praef.  in  Nov.  Test.,  1556. 

(c)  See  the  Pamphlet  called  a  Second  Defence  of  the 
Exposition  of  the  Doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England, 
&c.,p.  13,  n.  24. 


into  England)  received  as  a  perfect  rule  of 
faith  :"  for  which  he  cites  another  authority  like 
his  own.  But  how  true  this  is,  let  the  holy 
fathers  of  the  first  five  hundred  years  satisfy  us. 


St.  Chrysostom,  expounding  the  words  of  St. 
Paul,  (2  Thess.  xv.)  affirms,  that  "  Hereby  it 
appears,  that  the  apostles  did  not  deliver  all 
things  by  epistle,  but  many  things  without  wri- 
ting ;  and  these  are  worthy  of  faith  :  wherefore 
also,  let  us  esteem  the  tradition  of  the  church 
to  be  believed.  It  is  a  tradition,  seek  no  fur- 
ther." (d) 


And  the  same  exposition  is  given  by  St.  Basil, 
Theophylact,  and  St.  John  Damascene  :  as  also 
by  St.  Epiphanius  ;  who  says,  "  We  must  use 
tradition,  for  all  things  cannot  be  received  from 
divine  scripture  ;  wherefore  the  ]  ly  ap^cles 
have  delivered  some  things  by  tradition  :  even 
as  the  holy  apostle  says,  as  I  have  delivered  to 
you,  and  elsewhere ;  so  I  teach,  and  have  de- 
livered in  the  churches."  (e) 


St.  Augustine,  proving  that  those  who  were 
baptized  by  heretics  should  not  be  re-baptized, 
says,  "  the  apostles  commanded  nothing  hereof; 
but  that  doctrine  which  was  opposed  herein 
against  Cyprian,  is  to  be  believed  to  proceed 
from  their  tradition,  as  many  things  be,  which 
the  church  holds  ;  and  are  therefore,  well  be- 
lieved to  be  commanded  of  the  apostles,  al- 
though they  are  not  written."  (f)  These  words 
of  this  great  doctor  are  so  clear,  that  Mr.  Cart- 
wright,  (g)  a  Protestant,  speaking  thereof,  says, 
"  To  allow  St.  Augustine's  words,  is  to  bring  in 
Popery  again."  And  in  another  place,  (A)  "  If 
St.  Augustine's  judgment  be  a  good  judgment, 
then  there  be  some  things  commanded  of  God, 
which  are  not  in  the  scriptures,  and  thereupon 
no  sufficient  doctrine  contained  in  the  scriptures." 
How  to  make  all  this  agree  with  the  doctrine  of 
our  present  ministerial  guides  of  the  Church 
of  England,  who  teach  that  in  those  primitive 
times,  "  the  scripture  was  received  as  a  perfect 
and  only  rule  of  faith,"  will  be  a  task  that,  I  am 
confident,  no  wise  man,  who  has  either  honour, 
credit,  or  respect  for  truth,  will  venture  to  un- 
dertake. 


{d)  St.  Chrys.  in  2  Thes.  Horn.  4. 

(c)  See  St.  Basil  de  Spirit.  Sanct.,  c.  20  ;  Theophil.  in 
2  Thess.  ii. ;  St.  Damasc,  cap.  17,  de  Imag.  Sanct.  ;  St 
Epiph.  Hctr.  61. 

(/)  St.  Aug.  de  Bapt.  contra  Don.,  lib.  5,  cap.  23. 

Qr)  In  Whitg.  Def.,  p.  103. 

(A)  And  his  Second  Reply  against  Whitg.,  part  L,  pp. 
84,  85,  86. 


XXIII. PROTESTANT    TRANSLATION' AGAINST    THE    SACRAMENT    OF    MARRIAGE. 


87 


The  Book, 

Chap     -, 

and  Verse. 


Ephesians 
chap.  v. 
verse  32. 


The  Vulgate  Latin  Text. 


"  Sacramentum  " 
(iv^qiov,  hoc  mag- 
num est.  (1) 


The  true  English  accord- 
ing to  the  Rhemish 
Translation. 


This   is   a  great 
"  sacrament." 


Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 
testant Bibles,  printed 
a.  D.  1562,  1577,  1579. 


This   is   a  great 
"  secret."  ( 1 ) 


The  last    Translation  of 

the  Protestant  Bible,  Ed. 

Lon.  an.  1683. 


This  is 
"  mystery.' 


great 


(1)  The  church  of  God  esteems  marriage  a  holy 
Sacrament,  as  giving  grace  to  the  married  per- 
sons, to  live  together  in  love,  concord,  and 
fidelity.  But  Protestants,  who  reckon  it  no 
more  than  a  civil  contract,  as  it  is  amongst  in- 
fidels, translated  this  text  accordingly,  calling  it, 
in  their  first  translations,  instead  of  a  "  great 
sacrament,"  or  "  mystery,"  as  in  the  Greek,  a 
"  gr?at  secret." 


But  we  will  excuse  them  for  not  translating 
"  sacrament,"  because  they  pretended  not  to 
translate  the  Latin  but  the  Greek  :  yet,  however, 
we  must  ask  them,  why  they  call  it  not  "  mys- 
tery," as  it  is  in  the  Greek  ?  Doubtless,  they 
can  give  us  no  other  reason,  but  that  thev 
wished  only  to  avoid  both  those  words,  which 
are  used  in  the  Latin  and  Greek  Church,  to  sig- 
nify sacrament ;  for  the  word  mystery  is  the 
same  in  Greek,  that  sacrament  is  in  Latin  ;  and 
in  the  Greek  church,  the  sacrament  of  the  body 
and  blood  itself,  is  called  by  the  name  of  mys- 
tery, or  mysteries  ;  so  that,  if  they  should  have 
called  matrimony  by  that  name,  it  would  have 
sounded  equally  well  as  a  sacrament  also :  but 
in  saying,  "  it  is  a  great  secret,"  they  are  sure  it 
shall  not  be  taken  for  a  sacrament. 


But  perhaps,  they  will  say,  is  not  every  sacra- 
ment and  mystery,  in  English,  "  a  secret  ?"  Yes, 
as  angel  is  a  "  messenger  ;"  priest,  an  "  elder  ;" 
apostle,  "  one  that  is  sent ;"  baptism,  "  washing ;" 
evangelist,  "  a  bringer  of  good  news  ;"  Holy 
Ghost,  "  Holy  Wind  ;"  bishop,  "  overseer  or 
superintendent."  But  when  the  holy  scripture 
uses  these  words  to  signify  more  excellent  and 
divine  things  than  those  of  the  common  sort, 
pray  does  it  become   translators  to  use  profane, 


instead  of  ecclesiastical  terms,  and  thereby  to 
disgrace  the  writing  and  meaning  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  ? 


The  same  Greek  word,  in  all  other  places,  (a) 
they  translated  mystery ;  who,  therefore,  can 
imagine  any  other  reason  for  the  translating  of  it 
"  secret"  in  this  place,  than  lest  it  might  seem  to 
make  against  their  heretical  opinion,  "  That 
marriage  is  no  sacrament  V  though  the  apostle 
makes  it  such  a  mystery,  or  sacrament,  as  repre- 
sents no  less  than  the  conjunction  of  Christ  and 
his  church,  and  whatsoever  is  most  excellent  in 
that  conjunction. 


And  St.  Augustine  teaches,  that  "  a  certain 
sacrament  of  marriage  is  commended  to  the 
faithful  that  are  married ;  whereupon  the 
apostle  says  :  '  Husbands,  love  your  wives  ;  as 
Christ  loved  the  church.'  "  (b)  And  Fulk  grants, 
that  "  Augustine  and  some  others  of  the  ancient 
fathers  take  it,  that  matrimony  is  a  great  mystery 
of  the  conjunction  of  Christ  and  his  church."  (c) 


But  because  they  have  kept  to  the  Greek  in 
their  last  translation,  I  shall  say  no  more  of  it ; 
nor  should  I  indeed  have  thus  much  noticed  it 
here,  but  to  show  the  reader  how  intolerably 
partial  and  crafty  they  were  in  their  first  trans- 
lations. 


(a)  Tim.  iii.;  Col.  i.  26;  Eph.  iii.  9;  1  Cor.  xv.  15. 

(b)  St.  Aug.  de  Nupt.  et  Concup.,  lib.  i.  c.  10. 

(c)  Fulk.  in  Rhem.  Test,  in  Ephes.  v.  32,  sect.  5. 


Here  follow  several  heretical  additions,  and  other  notorious  falsifications,  6fc. 


88 


XXIV. PROTESTANT  CORRUPTIONS 


The  Book, 

Chapter, 

and  Verse. 


2  Paralip. 
or  Chron. 
ch.  xxxvi. 
verse  8. 


Acts  of 
the  Apos. 
chap.  ix. 
verse  22. 


1  St.  Peter 
chap.  i. 
verse  25. 
See  the 
like  addi- 
tion in 
1  Corinth, 
chap.  ix. 
verse  17. 


St.  James 
chap.  iv. 
verse  6. 


Colossians 
chap.  i. 
verse '23. 


The  Vulgate  Latin  Text. 


Reliqua  autem 
verborum  Joahim,  et 
abominationum  ejus, 
quas  operatus  est, 
uet  qua  inventa  sunt 
in  eo"  continentur  in 
libro  regum  Jud<B  el 
Israel.  (1) 


Et  confundebat 
JudxQS  qui  habita- 
bant  Damasei,  affir- 
mans  quoniam  hie  est 
Christus.  (2) 


Vcrbum  autem 
Do;  dni  manet  in 
(Sternum :  hoc  est 
auttrm  verbum  quod 
"  evangelizatum  est" 
in  vos.  (3) 


Majorem     autem 
dat  gratiam.  (4) 


Si  tamen  permane- 
tis  in  fide  fundati  et 
s tallies,  et  immobiles 
a  spe  evangelii  quod 
audistis,  quod  prmdi- 
catum  est  in  universa 
crealura  que  sub 
cozh  est.  (5) 


The  true  English  accord- 
ing to  the  Rhemish 
Translation. 


But  the  rest  of 
the  words  of  Joakim, 
and  of  his  abomi- 
nations which  he 
wrought,  "  and  the 
things  that  were 
found  in  him,"  are 
contained  in  the 
book  of  the  kings  of 
Judah  and  Israel. 


And  confounded 
the  Jews, &c, affirm- 
ing that  this  is 
Christ. 


But  the  word  of 
our  Lord  remaineth 
for  ever :  and  this 
is  the  word  that 
"  is  evangelized  " 
among  you. 


And  giveth  greater 
graces. 


If  yet  ye  continue 
in  the  faith  ground- 
ed and  stable,  and 
unmoveable  from 
the  hope  of  the  gos- 
pel which  you  have 
heard,  which  is 
preached  among  all 
creatures,  &c. 


Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 
testant Bibles,  printed 
a.  D.  1562,  1577,  1579. 


The  rest  of  the 
acts  of  Jehoakin, 
and  his  abomina- 
tions which  he  did, 
"  and  carved  images 
that  were  laid  to  his 
charge,"behold  they 
are  written  in  the 
book  of  the  kings  of 
Judah  and  Israel. 
(1) 


Saul  confounded 
the  Jews,  proving, 
"  by  conferring  one 
scripture  with  ano- 
ther," that  this  is 
very  Christ.  (2) 


The  word  of  the 
Lord  endureth  for 
ever  :  and  this  is  the 
word  which  "  by  the 
gospel"  was  preach- 
ed unto  you.  (3) 


But  "  the  scrip- 
ture" offereth  grea- 
ter grace. (4) 


If  ye  continue 
established  in  the 
faith,  and  be  not 
moved  away  from 
the  hope  of  the 
gospel,  which  you 
have  heard  "  how  it 
was"  preached.  Or, 
"  whereof"  ye  have 
heard  "how that  it" 
is  preached.  Or, 
"  whereof"  ye  have 
heard  "  and  which 
hath  been"preached. 
(5) 


The  last    Translation  of 

the  Protestant  Bible,  Ed. 

Lon.  an.  1683. 


# 

Corrected. 


Corrected. 


—  And  this  is 
the  word,  which 
"  by  the  gospel"  is 
preached  unto  you. 


But  "he"  giveth 
more  grace. 


Which  ye  have 
heard,  "  and  which 
was"  preached  to 
every  creature 


BV  ADDING    TO    THE    TEXT. 


69 


(1)1  have  not  set  down  these  few  examples 
of  their  additions,  as  if  they  were  all  the  only 
places  in  the  Bible  that  were  corrupted  after 
this  manner  ;  for  if  you  observe  well  in  the  fore- 
going chapters,  you  will  find  both  additions  and 
diminutions  ;  and  that  so  frequently  done,  and 
with  such  wonderful  boldness,  as  if  these  trans- 
lators had  been  privileged  by  especial  license  to 
add  to,  or  diminish  from,  the  sacred  text  at 
their  pleasures :  or,  as  if  themselves  had  been 
only  excepted  from  that  general  curse  denounced 
against  all  such  as  either  add  to,  or  diminish 
from  it,  in  the  close  of  the  Holy  Bible  (Apo- 
calypse xxii.  18,  19,)  in  these  words,  "  For  I 
testify  to  every  one,  hearing  the  words  of  the 
prophecy  of  this  book  :  If  any  man  shall  add  to 
these  things,  God  shall  add  unto  him  the  plagues 
written  in  this  book.  And  if  any  man  shall 
diminish  of  the  words  of  the  book  of  this  pro- 
phecy, God  shall  take  away  his  part  out  of  the 
book  of  life,  and  out  of  the  holy  city,  and  of 
these  things  that  be  written  in  this  book." 

Against  holy  images  they  maliciously  add  to 
the  text  these  words  "  carved  images,  that  were 
laid  to  his  charge."  And  to  what  intent  is  this, 
but  to  deceive  the  ignorant  reader,  and  to  fo- 
ment his  hatred  against  the  images  of  Christ, 
and  his  saints  ?  as  they  have  done  also  in  another 
place,  (Rom.  xi.  4,)  where  they  maliciously  add 
the  word  "  image"  to  the  text,  where  it  is  not  in 
the  Greek,  saying,  instead  of  "  I  have  left  me 
seven  thousand  men,  who  have  not  bowed  their 
knees  to  Baal,"  thus,  "  I  have  left  me  seven 
thousand  men,  who  have  not  bowed  their  knee  to 
the  image  of  Baal."  (a) 

(2)  "  By  conferring*  one  scripture  with 
another:"  this  is- added  more  than  is  in  the 
Greek,  in  favour  of  their  presumptuous  opinion, 
that  the  comparing  of  the  scriptures  is  enough 
for  any  man  to  undertsand  them  himself,  solely 
by  his  own  diligence  and  endeavour  ;  and  thereby 
to  reject  both  the  commentaries  of  the  doctors, 
and  the  exposition  of  holy  councils,  and  the  Ca- 
tholic Church,  (b) 

(3)  "By  the  gospel:"  These  words  are 
added  deceitfully,  and  of  ill  intent,  to  make  the 
simple  reader  think,  that  there  is  no  other  word 
of  God,  but  the  written  word ;  for  the  common 
reader,  hearing  this  word  gospel,  conceives 
nothing  else.  But  indeed  all  is  gospel,  what- 
soever the  apostles  taught,  either  by  writing,  or 
by  tradition,  and  word  of  mouth. 

It  is  written  of  Luther,  (c)  that  in  his  first 
translation  of  the  Bible  into  the  German  tongue, 
he  left  out  these  words  of  the  apostle  clearly : 
"  This  is  the  word  which  is  evangelized  to  you  ;" 
because  St.  Peter  does  here  define  what  is  the 
word  of  God,  saying  :  "  That  which  is  preached" 
to  you,  and  not  that  only  which  is  written. 


(a)  Bible  1562. 

(b)  Bible  1577. 

(c)  Lind.  Dubitat.,  p.  68. 


(4)  In  this  place  they  add  to  the  text  the 
words  "  the  scripture ;"  where  the  apostle  may 
as  well,  and  indifferently  say  :  "  The  Spirit,"  or, 
"  Holy  Ghost,"  gives  more  graces,  as  is  more 
probable  he  meant,  and  is  so  expounded  by 
many.  And  so  also  this  last  translation  of  theirs 
intimates,  by  inserting  the  word  He  :  "  But  He 
giveth  more  grace  :"  though  this  is  more  than 
they  can  stand  by.  But  they  will  never  be  pre- 
vented from  inserting  their  commentary  in  the 
text,  and  restraining  the  "  Holy  Ghost"  to  one 
particular  sense,  where  his  words  seem  to  be 
ambiguous,  which  the  Latin  interpreter  never 
presumed  to  do,  but  always  leaves  it  as  open  to 
either  signification  in  the  Latin,  as  he  found  it 
in  the  Greek. 

(5)  Lv  this  last  place  they  alter  the  apostle's 
plain  speech  with  certain  words  of  their  own  ; 
for  they  will  not  have  him  say,  "Be  immoveable 
in  the  faith  and  gospel,  which  you  have  heard, 
which  has  been  preached  ;"  but,  "  whereof  you 
have  heard  how  it  was  preached  ;"  and  though 
he  spoke  not  of  the  gospel  preached  to  them, 
but  of  a  gospel  which  they  had  only  heard  of, 
that  was  preached  in  the  world. 

The  apostle  exhorts  the  Colossians  to  con- 
tinue grounded  in  the  faith  and  gospel,  which 
they  had  heard  and  received  from  their  apos- 
tles. (<l)  But  our  Protestants,  who  with  Hy- 
menals and  Alexander,  and  other  old  heretics, 
have  fallSh  from  their  first  faith,  approve  not  of 
this  exhortation. 

It  is  certain  that  these  words,  "  whereof  you 
have  heard  how  it  was  preached,"  are  not  so  in 
the  Greek  ;  but,  "  which  you  have  heard,  which 
has  been  preached :"  as  if  it  were  said,  that 
they  should  continue  constant  in  the  faith  and 
gospel,  which  themselves  had  received,  and 
which  was  then  preached  and  received  in  the 
whole   world. 

In  Cor.  xiv.  4,  where  it  is  said,  "  He  that 
speaketh  with  tongues,  edifieth  himself;"  the 
Bible  printed  1633,  translates  thus  :  "  He  that 
speaketh  in  an  unknown  tongue,  edifieth  him- 
self;" so  likewise  in  the  13th,  14th,  19th,  and 
27th  verses,  they  make  the  same  addition  ;  so 
that  in  this  one  chapter  they  add  the  word  "  un- 
known" no  less  than  five  times  to  the  text,  where 
it  is  not  in  the  Greek.  And  this  they  do,  on  pur- 
pose to  make  it  seem  to  the  ignorant  people,  that 
mass  and  other  ecclesiastical  offices  ought  not  to 
be  said  in  Latin  :  whereas  there  is  nothing  here 
either  written  or  meant  of  any  other  tongues, 
but  such  as  men  spoke  in  the  primitive  church 
by  miracle ;  to  wit,  barbarous  and  strange 
tongues,  which  could  not  be  interpreted  com- 
monly, but  by  the  miraculous  gift  also  of  inter- 
pretation :  and  though  also  they  might  by  a 
miracle  speak  the  Latin,  Greek,  or  Hebrew 
tongues  ;  yet  these  could  not  be  counted  unknown 


(d)  I  Tim.  i.  6. 


90 


PROTESTANT  CORRUPTIONS  BY  ADDING  TO  THE  TEXT. 


tongues,  as  being  the  common  languages  of  the 
world,  and  of  the  learned  in  every  city  ;  and  in 
which  also  the  scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testament  were  written ;  which  could  not  be 
said  to  have  been  written  in  an  unknown  tongue, 
though  they  were  not  penned  in  the  vulgar  lan- 
guage, peculiar  to  all  people  ;  but  in  a  learned 
and  known  speech,  capable  of  being  interpreted 
by  thousands  in  every  country,  though  not  by 
every  illiterate  person. 

I  would  gladly  know  irom  our  translators, 
what  moved  them  to  add  the  word  "  unknown" 
in  some  places,  and  not  in  others,  where  the 
Greek  word  is  the  same  in  all  ?  For  instance,  in 
the  fifth  verse  of  this  chapter,  where  the  apos- 
tle wishes  that  all  should  speak  with  tongues  ; 
they  translate  exactly  according  to  the  Greek, 
without  adding  to  the  text  ;  when  in  all  the 
other  places,  where  they  think  there  may  be 
some  shadow  or  colour  of  having  it  meant  of 
the  general  tongue,  and  known  language  of 
the  church,  they  partially,  and  with  a  very  ill 
meaning,  thrust  in  the  word  "  unknown."  See 
the  annotations  upon  this  place,  in  the  Rhemish 
Testament 

Again,  Rom.  xii.  6,  7,  where  the  apostle's 
words  are,  "  Having  gifts  according  to  the  grace 
that  is  given  us,  different,  either  prophecy  ac- 
cording to  the  rule  of  faith :  or  ministry,  in 
ministering ;  or  he  that  teaches,  in  doctrine ;" 
they,  by  adding  several  words  of  their  own,  not 
found  in  the  Greek,  and  altering  others,  make 
the  text  run  thus  ;  "  Having  then  gifts,  differing 
according  to  the  grace  that  is  given  us,  whether 
prophecy  (let  us  prophecy)  according  to  the 
proportion  of  faith  ;  or  ministry  (let  us  wait  on 
our)  ministering ;  or  he  that  teaches  on  teach- 
ing." 

Besides  their  additions  here,  they  pervert  the 
text,  by  changing  the  word  "  rule"  of  faith  into 
"  proportion"  of  faith  ;  whereby  they  would  have 
their  readers  to  gather  no  more  from  this  place, 
than  only  that  their  new  ministers  are  to  pro- 
phecy or  preach,  and  wait  on  their  ministering 
according  to  the  measure  or  proportion  of  faith 
or  ability,  less  or  more,  that  they  are  endued 
with.  Whereas  by  this  text,  as  also  by  many 
other  places  of  holy  writ,  we  may  gather  that 
the  apostles,  by  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
before  they  divided  themselves  into  divers  na- 
tions, made  among  themselves  a  certain  rule  and 
form  of  faith  and  doctrine,  containing  not  only  the 
twelve  Articles  of  the  Creed  ;  but  all  other  prin- 
ciples, grounds,  and  the  whole  platform  of  the 
Christian  Religion  ;  which  rule  was  before  any 
of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  were  writ- 
ten, and  before  the  faith  was  preached  among  the 
Gentiles  ;  by  which  rule  not  only  the  doctrine 
of  all  other  inferior  teachers  was  to  be  tried,  but 
also  the  preaching,  writing,  and  interpreting, 
which  is  here  called  prophecying,  of  the  apos- 
tles and  evangelists  themselves,  wore  by  God's 
Church  approved  and  admitted,  or  reproved  and 
rejected  according  to  this  rule  of  faith.     This 


form  or  rule  every  apostle  delivered  by  word  of 
mouth,  not  by  scripture,  to  the  country  by  them 
converted,  which  was  also  by  the  apostolical 
men,  and  those  who  received  it  entire  from  the 
apostles,  delivered  also  entire  to  the  next  follow- 
ing age  ;  which  also  receiving  it  from  them,  de- 
livered it  as  they  had  received  it,  to  the  succeed- 
ing age,  &c,  till  this  our  present  age. 

And  this  is  the  true  analogy  of  faith,  set  down 
and  commended  to  us  everywhere  for  apostolical 
tradition  ;  and  not  the  fantastical  rule  or  square, 
which  every  ministerial  guide,  according  to  his 
great  or  small  proportion  of  faith,  pretends  to 
gather  out  of  the  scriptures,  as  understood  by 
his  own  private  spirit,  and  wrested  to  his  own 
heretical  purpose  ;  by  which  he  will  presume  to 
judge  of,  and  censure  the  fathers,  councils, 
church,  yea,  the  scripture  itself.  In  the  primi- 
tive church,  as  also  in  the  church  of  God,  at 
this  day,  all  teaching,  preaching,  and  prophecy- 
ing are  not  measured  according  to  the  proportion 
of  every  man's  private  and  public  spirit,  but  by 
this  rule  of  faith,  first  set  down  and  delivered  by 
the  apostles  :  and  therefore,  whatsoever  novelties 
or  prophecyings  will  not  abide  this  text,  they 
are  justly,  by  the  apostles,  condemned,  as  con- 
trary and  against  the  rule  of  faith  thus  delivered. 

I  cannot  omit  taking  notice,  in  this  place,  of 
two  "  notorious  and  gross  corruptions"  in  their 
first,  translation,  seeing  they  much  concern  the 
Church  of  England's  "  priesthood."  The  first  is 
in  Acts  i.  26,  where,  instead  of  saying  :  "  He, 
Matthias,  was  numbered  with  the  eleven  ;"  they 
translate  it,  "  He  was,  by  a  common  consent, 
counted  with  the  eleven."  The  other,  already 
mentioned,  is,  "  Acts,  xiv.  22,  where,  for,  "  When 
they  had  ordained  to  them  priests  in  every 
church,"  they  say :  "  When  they  had  ordained 
elders  by  election  in  every  congregation."  In 
one  of  these  texts,  the  words,  "  by  a  common 
consent,"  and  in  the  other,  "  by  election,"  are 
added  on  purpose  to  make  the  scripture  speak  in 
defence  of  their  making  superintendents  and  el- 
ders by  election  only,  without  consecration  and 
ordination,  by  imposition  oi  bands  :  by  which 
corrupt  additions  it  evidently  appears  to  have 
been  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England,  in 
those  days,  that  election  only,  without  conse- 
cration, was  sufficient  to  make  bishops  and 
priests. 

But  in  their  last  translation,  made  in  the  be- 
ginning of  King  James  the  First's  reign,  they 
have  corrected  these  places,  by  expunging  the 
words  formerly  added.  And  this  was  done  by 
the  bishops  and  clergy,  for  their  great  honour, 
dignity,  and  authority  ;  knowing  that  consecra- 
tion, which  they  thought  now  high  time  to  pre- 
tend to,  must  needs  elevate  them  much  above 
the  sphere  of  a  bare  election,  in  which  they  for- 
merly moved.  And  perhaps,  another  no  less 
prevalent  reason  was,  that  they  might  more  se- 
curely fix  themselves  in  their  bishoprics  and 
benefices  ;  thinking,  perhaps,  that  bishops  con- 
secrated,   might   pretend    to   that  jure   divino, 


CONSIDERATIONS  ONT  THE  LAMBETH   RECORDS. 


91 


which  men  only  elected  by  the  congregation  or 
prince,  held  at  the  mercy  and  good  liking  of  the 
electors  :  what  other  motives  induced  them  to 
this,  matters  not.  However,  they  thought  it 
now  convenient  to  pretend  to  something  more 
than  a  bare  election  ;  to  wit,  to  receive  an  epis- 
copal and  priestly  character,  by  the  imposition 
of  hands  :  whereas  we  find  not,  that  their  prede- 
cessors, Parker,  Jewel,  Horn,  &c,  ever  pre- 
tended to  any  other  character,  but  what  they 
received  by  the  Queen's  letters  patent,  election, 
and  an  act  of  parliament ;  as  is  plain  from  the 
23rd  and  25th  of  their  39  Articles,  as  well  as 
from  the  statute  8  Eliz.  I.,  and  therefore  were 
content  to  have  the  scripture  read,  "  He  was,  by 
a  common  consent,  counted  with  the  eleven  ;" 
and,  "  When  they  had  ordained  elders  by  elec- 
tion."^) 

And  whereas  our  present  ministerial  guides  of 
the  Church  of  England,  would  gladly  have 
le  believe  them  to  have  a  succession  of 
bishops  from  the  apostolic  times  to  this  day  ;  yet 
so  far  was  Mr.  Parker,  Jewel,  and  the  rest  of 
their  first  bishops,  from  pretending  to  any  such 
episcopal  succession,  "  if  they  had  been  truly 
consecrated,  they  must  of  necessity  have  owned 
and  maintained  a  succession  among  them,"  that, 
on  the  contrary,  they  published  and  preached 
many  things  to  discredit  the  same  :  and  to  that 


purpose,  falsified  and  corrupted  the  scripture 
against  succession,  for  in  the  defence  of  the 
apology  of  the  Church  of  England,  they  write 
thus  :  "  By  succession  Christ  saith,  that  desola- 
tion shall  sit  in  the  holy  place,  and  anti-christ 
shall  press  into  the  room  of  Christ ;"  for  proof 
of  which,  they  note  in  the  margin,  Matt.  xxiv. 
And  in  another  place  of  the  same  defence,  they 
say  of  succession  :  St.  Paul  says  to  the  faithful  at 
Ephesus  :  "  I  know  that  after  my  departure 
hence,  ravening  wolves  shall  enter  and  succeed 
me  ;  and  out  of  yourselves  there  shall,  by  suc- 
cession, spring  up  men  speaking  perversely ;" 
whereas  St.  Paul  has  never  a  word  about  suc- 
cession or  succeeding  ;  nor  is  succession  named 
in  the  24th  of  St.  Matthew. (c)  So  that  you 
see,  the  first  bishops  of  the  Church  of  England, 
not  only  corrupted  the  sacred  text,  in  translating 
many  places  of  the  Bible  against  ordination  ; 
but  also  in  their  other  writings,  falsified  the  scrip- 
ture with  their  corrupt  additions  against  succes- 
sion. (J)  Two  sufficient  reasons  for  us  to  believe, 
that  they  neither  had  nor  pretended  to  either  con- 
secration, or  episcopal  succession  in  those  days  ; 
consequently  were  not  consecrated  at  Lambeth, 
by  such  as  had  received  their  consecration  and 
character  from  Roman  Catholic  bishops,  who 
claim  it  no  otherwise  than  by  an  uninterrupted 
succession  from  the  apostles,  and  so  from  Christ. 
And  this  obliges  me  to  digress  a  little  into  (d) 


CONSIDERATIONS  ON  THE  LAMBETH  RECORDS, 

BY  WHICH  PROTESTANT  BISHOPS  ENDEAVOUR  TO  PROVE  THE  CONSECRATION  OF  THKIR  FIRST 
ARCHBISHOP  OF  CANTERBURY,  DR.  MATTHEW  PARKER. 


(b)  In  the  beginning  of  King  James  the 
First's  reign,  a  new  translation  of  the  Bible  being 
undertaken,  the  said  falsifications  of  scripture 
corrected,  and  a  full  resolution  put  on  of 
assuming  to  themselves  the  character  of  conse- 
crated bishops  and  priests ;  they  thought  it 
absolutely  necessary  to  derive  this  character 
from  such  bishops  as  had  been,  as  they  thought, 
consecrated  by  Roman  Catholic  bishops ;  by 
whose  hands  they  would  now  make  the  world 
believe,  the  first  of  their  predecessors,  Matthew 
Parker,  was  consecrated  with  great  solemnity 
at  Lambeth.  To  which  purpose,  they  presume 
to  obtrude  upon  the  world  certain,  before  un- 
heard of,  records  or  registers.  But  the  age  in 
which  the  sun  first  shone  upon  these  records, 
viz.,  anno  1613,  not  being  so  easily  imposed  upon 
as  was  expected,  the  said  Lambeth  Register 
became  suspected,  and,  for  divers  reasons, 
detected  as  a  forged  instrument.  Fitzhcrbert, 
a  man  of  gr  at  sincerity  and  authority,  writ 
against  these  Lambeth  Records,  in  the  very  year 

(a)  Dr.  Tenison  and  A.  B.,  in  the  Speculum  Considered, 
p.  4!),  tell  us, "  That  in  the  Church  of  England  they  have 
a  succession  of  bishops  continued  down  from  the  apos- 
tolic time3  to  this  day  ;  but  to  name  or  number  them," 
they  say,  "  is  neither  necessary  nor  useful."  They  might 
have  added,  not  possible. 

(6)  The  Lambeth  Records  Considered. 


that  Mr.  Mason,  workman  to  Dr.  Abbot, 
archbishop  of  Canterbury,  first  published  them 
to  the  world.  These  are  his  words  :  («.•)  "  It 
was  my  chance  to  understand,  that  one  Mr. 
.Mason,  lately  published  a  book,  wherein  he 
endeavours  to  prove  the  consecration  of  the 
first  Protestant  bishops,  by  a  register,  testifying, 
that  four  bishops  consecrated  Matthew  Parker, 
the  first  archbishop  of  Canterbury.  Thou  shalt 
therefore  understand,  good  reader,  that  this  our 
exception,  touching  the  lawful  vocation  and 
consecration  of  the  first  Protestant  bishops  in 
the  late  queen's  day,  is  not  a  new  quarrel,  now 
lately  raised,  but  vehemently  urged  divers  times 
heretofore,  by  many  other  Catholics,  many  years 
ago ;  yea,  in  the  very  beginning  of  the  late 
queen's  reign  :  as  namely,  by  two  learned  doc- 
tors, Harding  and  Stapleton,  who  mightily 
pressed  them  with  the  defect  of  due  vocation 
and  consecration,  urging  them  to  prove  the  same, 
and  to  show  how,  and  by  whom  they  were  made 
priests  and  bisheps."     Thus  he. 

(c)  See  the  Defence  of  the  Apol.,  pp.  132,  and  127. 

(d)  The  first  Protestant  bishops  and  clergy  were  so  far 
from  pretending  to  either  consecration  or  succession,  that 
they  corrupted  the  scripture  against  both. 

(e)  See  Fitzherbert's  Appendix  to  the  Discovery  of 
Dr.  Andrews'  Absurdities,  Falsities,  and  Lies,  printed 
anno  1613. 


92 


CONSIDERATIONS  ON  THE 


And  to  give  you  the  words  of  the  said  doc- 
tors :  thus  writes  Dr.  Harding  to  Mr.  Jewel, 
pretended  bishop  of  Salisbury :  "  It  remains, 
Mr.  Jewel,  you  tell  us,  whether  your  vocation 
be  ordinary  or  extraordinary  :  if  it  be  ordinary, 
show  us  the  letters  of  your  orders  ;  at  least, 
show  us  that  you  have  received  power  to  do  the 
office  you  presume  to  exercise,  by  the  due  order 
of  laying  on  of  hands,  and  consecration  :  but 
order  and  consecration  you  have  none  ;  for 
which  of  all  these  new  ministers,  howsoever  else 
you  call  them,  could  give  that  to  you,  which  he 
has  not  himself  ?"  These  are  his  very  words  to 
Mr.  Jewel  ;  having  but  a  little  before  urged 
him  also,  in  the  words  of  Tertullian,  thus  : 
"  You  know  what  Tertullian  says  of  such  as  you 
be,  Edant  origines  ecclesiarurn  suarum  ;  we  sav 
likewise  to  you,  Mr.  Jewel  ;  and  what  we  say  to 
you,  we  say  to  each  one  of  your  companions  : 
tell  us  the  original,  and  first  spring  of  your 
church  ;  show  us  the  register  of  your  bishops 
continually  succeeding  one  another  from  the 
beginning ;  so  as  that  the  first  bishop  may  have 
some  one  of  the  apostles,  or  of  the  apostolical 
men,  for  his  author,  and  predecessor,  &c.(a) 
Therefore,  says  he,  to  go  from  your  succession, 
which  you  cannot  prove,  and  to  come  to  your 
vocation  :  How  say  you,  sir  ?  you  bear  yourself, 
as  though  you  were  bishop  of  Salisbury  ;  but  how 
can  you  prove  your  vocation  ?  by  what  authority 
usurp  you  the  administration  of  doctrine  and 
sacraments  ?  what  can  you  allege  for  the  right 
and  proof  of  your  ministry  1  who  has  called  you  ? 
who  has  laid  hands  on  you  ?  by  what  example 
has  he  done  it  1  how,  and  by  whom  are  you  con- 
secrated ?  who  has  sent  you  1  who  has  committed 
to  you  the  office  you  take  upon  you  ?"  &c.  In 
this  manner  was  Mr.  Jewel  urged  :  to  all  which 
he  never  replied,  by  sending  Dr.  Harding  to 
any  register  of  his,  or  his  metropolitan's  conse- 
cration :  or  by  telling  him,  that  their  consecration 
at  Lambeth,  was  upon  record  :  or  that  they  had 
authentic  testimonies  to  show  who  imposed  hands 
upon  them.  And  how  easily  had  such  answers 
been  given  to  these  hard  questions,  if  there  had 
then  been  extant  any  authentic  register  or 
records  of  his  own,  or  of  Matthew  Parker's 
consecration  at  Lambeth. 

After  the  same  manner  he  is  set  upon  by  Dr. 
Stapleton,  in  his  answer  to  Mr.  Jewel's  book, 
entitled,  a  reply,  &c.  :  "  How  chanced  then,  Mr. 
Jewel,"  says  he,  "  that  you  and  your  fellows, 
bearing  yourselves  for  bishops,  have  not  so  much 
as  this  congruity  and  consent  ;  I  will  not  say  of 
the  Pope,  but  of  any  Christian  bishops  at  all, 
throughout  all  Christendom  ;  neither  are  liked 
and  allowed  by  any  one  of  them  all ;  but  have 
taken  upon  you  that  office,  without  any  imposi- 
tion of  hands,  without  all  ecclesiastical  authority, 
without  all  order  of  canons  and  right  1  I  ask  not, 
who  gave  you  bishoprics,  but  who  made  you 
bishops  !"     Thus  he  to  Jewel. (b) 

{a)  We  also  at  this  day  still  urge  our  Protestant  bish- 
ops to  prove  their  succession.  Bat  they,  instead  of  doing 
it,  waive  us  off  with  these  words  :  "  To  name  or  number 
our  bishops,  is  neither  useful  nor  necessary."  Vide  Supr. 

(b)  See  Stapleton's  Return  of  (Jntruhta.  His  Challenge 
to  Jewel  and  Horn,  and  his  Counterblast  against  Horn. 


And  thus  again,  in  his  Counterblast  against 
Horn,  pretended  bishop  of  Winchester:  "Is 
it  not  notorious,"  says  he  to  Horn,  "  that  you 
and  your  colleagues,  Parker,  &c,  were  not  or- 
dained according  to  the  prescript,  I  will  not  say 
of  the  church,  but  even  of  the  very  statutes  ? 
How  then  can  you  challenge  to  yourself  the 
name  of  the  lord  bishop  of  Winchester  ?"  And 
in  another  place  he  urges  Mr.  Horn  with  his 
"  being  without  any  consecration  at  all  of  his 
metropolitan,  Parker;  himself,  poor  man,"  says 
he,  "  being  no  bishop  neither."  Who,  I  say  once 
again,  can  imagine  Jewel  and  Horn  should  have 
been  so  careless  of  their  character  and  honour, 
as  not  to  have  produced  their  Lambeth  register 
and  records,  if  any  such  authentic  writings 
had  then  been  extant,  when  not  only  their  own 
credit,  but  even  the  credit  of  their  metropolitan, 
Parker,  and  all  the  rest  of  Queen  Elizabeth's 
new  bishops  ;  yea,  the  whole  succession  of  that 
race,  were  so  miserably  shipwrecked  ?  Yea,  in 
how  great  stead  would  such  Lambeth  writings 
have  stood  Mr.  Horn,  when  he  durst  not  join 
issue  with  bishop  Bonner  upon  the  plea,  "  That 
he  was  no  bishop,  when  he  tendered  Bonner  the 
oath  of  supremacy." 

The  case  was  thus  :(c)  By  the  first  session  of 
that  parliament,  5  Eliz.  I.,  power  was  given  to 
any  bishop  in  the  realm,  to  tender  the  oath  of 
supremacy,  enacted  1  Eliz.,  to  any  ecclesiastical 
person  within  his  diocese ;  and  the  refuser  was 
to  incur  a  premunire.  By  virtue  of  this  statute, 
Mr.  Robert  Horn,  pretended  bishop  of  Win- 
chester, tenders  the  oath  to  Doctor  Bonner, 
bishop  of  London,  but  deprived  by  Queen 
Elizabeth,  and  then  a  prisoner  in  the  Marshal- 
sea,  which  was  within  the  diocese  of  Winches- 
ter :  Bonner  refuses  to  take  it.  Horn  certifies 
his  refusal  into  the  King's  Bench  ;  whereupon 
Bonner  was  indicted  upon  the  statute.  He  prays 
judgment,  whether,  he  might  not  give  in  evi- 
dence upon  this  issue,  Quod  ipse  non  est  inde 
culpakilis,  eo  quod  dictus  episcopus  de  Winches- 
ter non  fait  episcopus  tempore  oblationis  sacra- 
menti.  "  That  he  was  not  culpable,  because 
the  said  Horn,  called  bishop  of  Winchester,  was 
not  bishop  when  he  tendered  him  the  oath."  And 
it  was  resolved  by  all  the  judges  at  Serjeants'- 
Inn,  in  judge  Cattlin,  the  chief  justice's  cham- 
ber, "  that  if  the  verity  and  matter  be  so,  indeed, 
he  should  well  be  received  to  give  in  evidence 
upon  this  issue,  and  the  jury  should  try  it." 
Now,  what  the  trial  was,  appears  by  that  he  was 
not  condemned,  nor  ever  any  further  trou- 
bled for  that  case,  though  he  was  a  man  espe- 
cially aimed  at.  And  at  the  next  sessions  of 
that  parliament,  which  was  the  8th  of  Elizabeth, 
they  were  forced  for  want,  you  see,  of  a  better 
character,  to  beg  they  might  be  declared  bish- 
ops by  act  of  parliament. 

Besides,  it  is  no  more  credible,  that  such 
knowing  and  conscientious  men,  as  Dr.  Staple- 
ton,  Dr.  Harding,  Constable,  Kelhson,  &c.  then 
living  in  England,  and  probably  at  London, 
would  question  so  public  and  solemn  an  action, 

(c)  See  Abridg.  of  Dyers  Reports,  fol.  234. 


LAMBETH    RECORDS. 


93 


than  it  is,  than  a  sober  man   should  now  call  in  j] 
doubt   king  James    the  Second's  coronation    at 
Westminster  ;  or  ask  in  print,  who  set  the  crown 
upon   his   head,  pretending  he  had  never  been 
crowned. 

But  in  answer  to  these  our  objections  :  Dr. 
Bramhall  falsely  affirms,  that  the  said  records 
were  spoken  of  in  the  eighth  year  of  queen 
Elizabeth  :  for  proof  of  which,  he  would  gladly 
have  the  world  so  grossly  to  mistake  the  words 
of  the  statute  of  the  8th  of  Eliz.  as  to  think  that 
the  mention  there  made  of  the  records  "  of  her 
majesty's  father  and  brother's  time,  and  also  for 
her  own  time,"  have  relation  to  their  Lambeth 
Register  :  whereas  by  the  records  there  spoken 
of,  is  understood  only  the  records  of  her  father's, 
brother's,  and  her  own  letters  patent ;  and  not 
their  then  unknown  Lambeth  Register. 

But  Dr.  Bramhall,  to  make  good  his  false  as- 
sertion, and  to  impose  upon  the  unwary  reader, 
most  egregiously  falsifies  the  words  of  the  said 
statute  ;  saying,  "  The  statute  speaks  expressly 
of  the  records  of  elections,  and  confirmations, 
and  consecrations  :"  (a)  but  you  will  find  in  the 
said  statute,  expressly  these  words  :  "  As  by  her 
majesty's  said  letters  patent,  remaining  on  re- 
cord, more  plainly  will  appear."  Which,  if  at- 
tentively considered,  is  sufficient  to  convince  the 
reader,  that  "  the  records  of  her  majesty's  said 
father's  and  brother's  time,  and  also  of  her  own 
time,"  relate  not  to  any  records  or  registers  of 
the  archbishop  of  Canterbury  ;  but  only  to  the 
records  of  the  king's  and  queen's  letters  patent. 
This  device  of  Bramhall  is  more  fully  answered 
and  refuted  by  the  author  of  the  "  Nullity  of  the 
Prelatical  Clergy  of  England  ;"  whither  I  will 
refer  my  reader. 

Again,  Protestants  tell  us  further,  (b)  that 
there  is  a  register  of  their  bishops,  found  in  a 
book  called  "  Parker's  Antiquitates  Britannicae  ;'" 
which  I  deny  not  :  but  to  this  I  answer,  that  the 
said  register  is  forged  and  foisted  into  Parker's 
Antiq.  Britan.  For  that  edition,  printed  anno 
1605,  is  the  first  that  ever  mentioned  any  such 
thing:  the  old  manuscript  of  that  book,  having 
no  such  register  at  all  in  it ;  as  a  learned  author 
(c)  who  diligently  examined  the  same,  affirms 
in  these  words  :  "  In  the  old  manuscript  of  that 
book,  Park.  Antiq.  Brit.,  which  I  have  seen,  and 
diligently  examined,  there  is  not  any  mention  or 
memorial  at  all  of  any  such  register  or  conse- 
cration of  Mat.  Parker,  or  any  one  of  those  pre- 
tended Protestant  bishops,  as  the  obtruded  re- 
gister speaks  of.  And  any  man  reading  the 
printed  book,  will  easily  see,  that  it  is  a  mere 
foisted  and  inserted  thing  ;  having  no  connec- 
tion, correspondence,  or  affinity,  either  with 
that  which  goes  before  or  follows ;  and  con- 
tains more  things  done  after  Mat.  Parker  had 
written    that    book."       Yet  this    very   register 


(a)  In  this  statute  is  expressly  mentioned  her  majes- 
ty's "  father's  and  brother's  letters  patent ;"  as  also  **  her 
own  remaining  on  recoid." 

(b)  Antiq.  Brit.,  edit.  Hanov.,  1605. 

(c)  The  author  of  a  book,  called,  "  The  Judgment  of  ; 
tne  Apostles  and  first  Age,  in  points  of  Doctrine,"  &c-,  I 
printed  in  the  year  1633.     See  pp.  209,  211,  and  391 


mentions  not  any  certain  place  or  form  of  their 
consecration  ;  so  that  it  might  be  performed  as 
well  at  the  Nag's  Head  as  at  Lambeth.  And 
indeed,  we  deny  them  not  to  have  had  a  certain 
kind  of  puritanical  consecration,  by  John  Scorey, 
at  the  Nag's  Head  in  Cheapside  ;  but  we  deny 
the  said  Nag's  Head  consecration  to  be  either 
valid  or  legal,  both  for  defect  in  the  form,  and 
in  the  minister,  John  Scorey  himself  being  no 
bishop,  no  more  than  Barlow  and  Coverdale,  as 
is  hinted  above,  in  page  53.  By  reason  of  which 
defects,  the  queen,  it  seems,  was  forced  after- 
wards to  declare,  or  make  them  bishops,  by  act 
of  parliament.  But  to  pass  by  these  things,  and 
to  come  to  a  closer  examination  of  their  Lam- 
beth Records  :  (d) 

Mr.  Mason,  the  very  first  man  that  ever  told 
us  of  this  Lambeth  Register,  urges  it  in  this 
manner :  («)  "  Queen  Mary  died  in  the  year 
1558,  the  17th  of  November ;  the  same  day  died 
cardinal  Pool,  archbishop  of  Canterbury  ;  and 
the  very  same  day  was  queen  Elizabeth  pro- 
claimed. The  1 5th  of  January  next  following, 
was  the  day  of  queen  Elizabeth's  coronation, 
when  Dr.  Oglcthorp,  bishop  of  Carlisle,  was  so 
happy  as  to  set  the  diadem  of  that  kingdom  upon 
her  royal  head.  Now  the  see  of  Canterbury 
continued  void  till  December  following  ;  about 
which  time  the  dean  and  chapter  having  received 
the  conge  (Ttlirc,  elected  master  Parker  for  their 
archbishop,  juxta  rnorcm  antiquum  et  laudabilem 
consuetudincm  eccle&ice  prwdictcB  ah  antiqua  usitu- 
tern  et  incussa  observation,  proceeding  in  this 
election  "  according  to  the  ancient  manner,  and 
the  laudable  custom  of  the  aforesaid  church  ;" 
citing  for  these  words,  his  new  found  register, 
ex  Regist.  Mat.  Parker.  "  After  which  elec- 
tion, orderly  performed,  and  signified  according 
to  the  law,  it  pleased  her  highness  to  send  her 
letters  patent  of  commission,  for  his  confirma- 
tion and  consecration,  to  seven  bishops  ;"  whose 
names,  with  as  much  of  the  commission  as  is 
necessary,  he  sets  down  ;  after  which  he  tells  us, 
"  That  to  take  away  all  scruple,  he  will  faithfully 
deliver  out  of  authentical  records,"  as  he  cails 
them,  putting  in  the  margin  ex  Regist.  M.  Par- 
ker, with  as  much  confidence  as  if  they  had  then 
been  made  known  to  the  world,  and  published  or 
produced  upon  all  occasions,  for  fifty  years  to- 
gether, before  ever  he  spoke  of  them,"  both  the 
day  when  he,  Mr.  Parker,  was  consecrated,  and 
by  whom,  viz., 


Anno  1559.  Mat.  Park. 
Cant.  cons.  17  Decemb. 
by 


William  Barlow, 
John  Scorey, 
Miles  Coverdale, 
John  Hodgkins." 


These  are  Mr.  Mason's  obtruded  records ; 
with  which  let  us  compare  the  words  of  another 
recorder,  Dr.  Bramhall,  who,  after  having  told 
us  of  Mat.  Parker's  being,  by  conge  d'clire, 
elected  archbishop  of  Canterbury,  says  :    (/) 


{d)  Stat.  I.,  8th  Eliz. 

(e)  Mason,  lib.  3,  p.  126. 

if)  Bram.  p.  83. 


13 


94 


CONSIDERATIONS    ON    THE 


V  The  queen,  accepting  this  election,  was  gra- 
ciously pleased  to  issue  out  two  commissions  for 
the  legal  confirmation  of  the  said  election,  and 
consecration  of  the  said  archbishop  ;  the  former 
dated  the  9th  of  September,  anno  1559,  directed 
to  six  bishops  ;  Cuthbert,  bishop  of  Durham  ; 
Gilbert,  bishop  of  Bath ;  David,  bishop  of 
Peterborough;  Anthony,  bishop  of  Landaff; 
William  Barlow,  bishop ;  and  John  Scorey, 
bishop."  Which  commission  he  sets  down  at 
large,  from  Ro.,  par.  2,  1  Eliz.  Dated,  Apud 
Redgrave,  Nono  die  Septembris  anno  regni 
Elizabeths  Anglce,  <$fc,  primo. 

Per  breve  de  privato  sigillo, 

Examinator,  Ri.  Broughton. 

Then  he  goes  on  :  (a)  "  Now  if  any  man  de- 
sire a  reason  why  this  first  commission  was  not 
executed,  the  best  account  I  can  give  him  is  this, 
that  it  was  directed  to  six  bishops,  without  an 
"  Aut  minus,  or  at  the  least  four  of  you ;"  so  as 
if  any  one  of  the  six  were  sick,  or  absent,  or 
refused,  the  rest  could  not  proceed  to  confirm  or 
consecrate.  And  that  some  of  them  did  refuse, 
I  am  very  apt  to  believe,  because  three  of  them, 
not  long  after,  were  deprived."  Thus  Dr. 
Bramhall. 

The  three  bishops,  he  means,  that  were,  as 
he  would  have  us  believe,  "  shortly  after  de- 
prived," were  Cuthbert  Tunstal,  bishop  of  Dur- 
ham ;  Gilbert  Bourn,  bishop  of  Bath  ;  and  David 
Pole,  bishop  of  Peterborough.  But  according 
to  John  Stow,  (b)  and  Hollinshead,  these  three 
bishops,  with  other  ten  or  eleven,  all  Catholics, 
were  deprived  and  deposed  from  their  sees,  in 
July  before,  for  refusing  the  oath  of  supremacy. 
"  In  the  month  of  July,"  says  Stow,  "  the  old 
bishops  of  England,  then  living,  were  called  and 
examined  by  certain  of  the  Queen's  Majesty's 
council,  where  the  bishops  of  York,  Ely,  and 
London,  with  others,  to  the  number  of  thirteen 
or  fourteen,  for  refusing  to  take  the  oath, 
touching  the  Queen's  supremacy,  and  other 
articles,  were  deprived  of  their  bishoprics." 
Hollinshead  hud  also  the  same  words,  and  tells 
us  further  who  succeeded  in  their  rooms  and 
places." 

Hollinshead,  in  the  praises  of  bishop  Tunstal, 
of  Durham,  has  these  words  :  "  He  was,  by  the 
noble  Queen  Elizabeth,  deprived  of  his  bishop- 
ric, <fec,  and  was  committed  to  Matthew  Parker, 
bishop  of  Canterbury,  who  used  him  very  hon- 
ourably, both  for  the  gravity,  learning,  and  age 
of  the  said  Tunstal  :  but  he,  not  long  remaining 
under  the  ward  of  the  said  bishop,  did  shortly 
after,  the  18th  of  November,  in  the  year  1559, 
depart  this  life  at  Lambeth,  where  he  first  re- 
ceived his  consecration."  By  this  it  appears, 
that  Matthew  Parker  was  bishop  of  Canterbury, 
and  lived  in  the  bishop's  palace  at  Lambeth, 
consequently  installed  in  the  bishopric,  which 


(a)  P.  85. 

(b)  See  John  Stow  and  Hollinshed,  in  an.  1  Eliz. 


he  could  not  be  before  he  was  consecrated,  if 
consecration  was  then  used  ;  and  all  this  before 
the  18th  of  November,  1559. 

And  well  might  he,  by  this  time,  be  in  the 
full  enjoyment  and  possession  of  the  bishopric 
of  Canterbury  ;  for  by  Stow  and  Hollinshead, 
we  find  him  called  bishop  elect  on  the  9th  of 
September,  when  he  and  others  assisted  at  the 
king  of  France's  obsequies.  Yea,  by  Hollins- 
head, it  evidently  appears,  that  they  were  elected 
immediately,  or,  however,  very  shortly  after  the 
deprivation  of  the  old  Catholic  bishops  :  for,  on 
the  12th  of  August,  we  find  Doctor  Grindall 
not  only  called  bishop  elect,  but  exercising  as 
much  power,  as  if  he  had  been  more  than  only 
elect.  His  words  are  these  :  "  On  the  12th  of 
August,  being  Saturday,  the  high  altar  in  Paul's 
Church,  with  the  rood,  and  the  images  of  Mary 
and  John,  standing  in  the  rood-loft,  were  taken 
down ;  and  this  was  done  by  the  command  of 
Doctor  Grindall,  newly  elected  bishop  of  Lon- 
don." 

The  truth  of  what  I  have  here  set  down,  from 
Hollinshead  and  Stow,  is  unquestionable :  but 
if  it  agree  not  with  Mr.  Mason,  and  Doctor 
Bramhall,  and  their  Lambeth  Records,  shall  we 
not  have  just  cause  to  reject  these  as  forged  ? 
But,  before  we  compare  them  together,  let  us 
first  see  what  accordance  and  agreement  is 
found  among  the  records  and  recorders  them- 
selves. 

Firstly,  in  the  queen's  letters  patent,  or  com- 
mission for  consecrating  Matthew  Parker,  (c) 
the  suffragan  bishop,  there  mentioned,  is  named 
Richard,  suffragan  of  Bedford  ;  whereas  by  Mr. 
Mason  and  others,  he  is  called  John ;  yea, 
Mason  calls  him  John  in  one  place,  and  Richard 
in  another.  I  suppose  those,  who  made  these 
records,  might  be  ignorant  of  the  said  suffragan's 
name  ;  and  therefore  for  making  sure  work,  calls 
him  sometimes  Richard,  sometimes  John  ;  but  if 
these  records  had  been  made  while  the  man 
himself  was  living,  and  when  he  imposed  hands 
on  Matthew  Parker,  he  could  have  satisfied  them 
of  his  true  name,  and  the  place  where  he  was 
saffragan,  viz.,  whether  of  Bedford  or  Dover? 
And  whether  there  was  any  other  suffragan 
there  besides  himself,  if  we  suppose  that  the 
Lambeth  notarius  publicus  could  be  ignorant  of 
such  circumstances. 

Secondly,  Mr.  Sutcliff  affirms,  that  Parker 
was  consecrated  by  Barlow,  Coverdale,  Scorey, 
and  two  suffragans.  But  by  our  pretended 
register,  we  find  but  one  suffragan  at  that 
solemnity.  (</) 

Thirdly,  Mr.  Mason,  and  his  records,  style 
him  suffragan  of  Bedford ;  but  by  Doctor  Butler 
he  is  called  suffragan  of  Dover,  (e) 

Fourthly,  in  Mr.  Mason,  we  hear  tell  but  of 
one  commission  from  the  queen,  for  the  confir- 
mation and  consecration  of  Matthew  Parker. 
But  Bramhall,  by  more  diligent  search  among 


(c)  See  D.  Bram.,  pp.  87,  89,  90. 

\d)  Sutcliff*  against  Dr.  Kellison,  p.  5. 

(e)  Butler,  Ep.  de  Consecrat.  Minist. 


LAMBETH    RECORDS. 


95 


the  records,  finds  two  ;  the  first  dated  September 
the  9th.  (a) 

Fifthly,  by  which  commission  it  appears, 
Parker  was  elected  before  the  9th  of  Septem- 
ber :  but  Mr.  Mason  says,  he  was  elected  about 
the  beginning  of  December. 

Thus  they  concur  one  with  another :  and  to 
compare  them  with  Richard  Hollinshead,  and 
John  Stovv's  chronicles,  they  jump  as  exactly,  as 
if  the  one  had  been  written  at  China,  and  the 
other  at  Lambeth  :  for, 

Sixthly,  Mr.  Mason,  I  say,  affirms,  that  the 
dean  and  chapter  elected  Doctor  Matthew 
Parker  about  the  month  of  December,  But 
irf  Stow  and  Hollinshead,  we  find  him  and 
others  called  bishops  elect,  on  the  9th  of  Sep- 
tember. Yea,  seeing  Hollinshead  calls  Grindall 
newly  elect  on  the  12th  of  August,  we  may 
easily  conclude,  that  Matthew  Parker  the  metro- 
politan, was  also  elected  before  that  time  ;  which, 
you  see,  is  about  four  months  before  Mason's 
election  by  conge  cTelire. 

Seventhly,  Mr.  Mason  affirms,  that  the  see  of 
Canterbury  continued  void  till  December  1559. 
On  the  17th  of  which  month,  according  to  the 
new  register,  Parker  was  consecrated.  But 
in  Hollinshead  we  find,  that  Matthew  Parker 
was  bishop  of  Canterbury,  and  lived  in  the 
bishop's  place  at  Lambeth,  where  he  had  bishop 
Tunstal  committed,  prisoner,  to  his  charge,  long 
before  the  17th  of  December  :  for  on  the  J  8th 
of  November,  1559,  the  said  bishop  Tunstal 
died. 

Eighthly,  Doctor  Bramhall,  as  is  said,  from 
our  new-made  records,  brings  us  a  commission, 
dated  on  the  9th  of  September,  1559.  And 
directed,  besides  others,  to  three  Catholic 
bishops,  Cuthbert  Tunstal,  Gilbert  Bourn,  and 
David  Pool,  requiring  them  to  confirm  and 
consecrate  Matthew  Parker.  And  he  has  the 
confidence  to  affirm,  that  "  the  said  three 
bishops  were  shortly  after  deprived  of  their 
bishoprics,  as  he  is  very  apt  to  believe,  for 
refusing  to  obey  the  said  commission."  But  in 
Stow  and  Hollinshead  we  find,  that  the  said 
three  Catholic  bishops,  with  ten  or  eleven 
others,  were  deprived  of  their  bishoprics  in  the 
month  of  July  before,  for  refusing  the  oath  of 
supremacy  ;  and  Mason  himself  confirms  this,  by 
acknowledging  they  were  deprived  not  long 
after  the  feast  of  St.  John  the  Baptist  ;  for 
which  he  also  cites  Saunders,  lib  de  Schismate 
Angl.  But  pray  consider,  sirs,  what  can  be 
more  absurd,  than  to  imagine  that  Queen 
Elizabeth  would  be  beholden  to  such  Roman 
Catholic  bishops,  as  she  had  formerly  deprived 
of  their  bishoprics,  and  made  prisoners,  for  the 
confirming  and  consecrating  of  her  new  Protes- 
tant bishops,  who  were  to  be  "  unlawfully 
intruded"  into  their  sees  ;  especially  she  having, 
as  Bramhall  says,  Protestant  bishops  enough  of 
her  own  ;  or  if  such  had  been  wanting,  might, 
he  says,  have  easily  had  store  of  bishops  out  of 
Ireland,  to  have  done  the  work  ? 

Pray  give  me  leave  to  demand  of  our  English 

(a)  Bram.,  p.  83. 


prelates,  why  this  first  commission  was  by  the 
queen  directed  to  those  three  zealous  Catholic 
bishops,  and  not  rather  to  her  own  Protestant 
bishops,  to  whom  she  directed  the  last  commis- 
sion, dated  December  6  ?  Her  majesty  was  not 
ignorant  that  their  consciences  had  been  too 
tender  to  permit  them  to  swear  herself  head  of 
the  Church  of  England  :  and  that  rather  than 
gall  their  so  tender  consciences,  they  were  con- 
tent to  lose  their  bishoprics,  and  suffer  perpetual 
imprisonment :  could  she,  upon  revolving  this  in 
her  princely  thoughts,  easily  imagine  that  they 
would,  without  all  scruple,  impose  hands  on  her 
newly  elected  bishops,  whom  they  knew  to  be 
of  a  religion  as  far  different  from  themselves, 
as  king  Edward  the  YIth  was  from  queen 
Mary's  1  Could  she  suppose,  that  they  would 
make  bishops  in  that  church,  whereof  themselves 
refused  to  be  members  ?  Could  she  think,  that 
those  Catholic  bishops  would  consecrate  Parker, 
according  to  king  Edward  the  YIth's  form  of 
consecration,  which  they  had  in  queen  Mary's 
days  declared  to  be  invalid  and  null  ;  and  which, 
at  this  time,  was  also  illegal  1  Or  could  the 
queen  easily  imagine,  that  Matthew  Parker  and 
the  rest  of  her  chosen  bishops,  who  had  stood 
so  much  upon  their  punctilios  at  Frankfort, 
would  receive  consecration  by  a  form  condemned 
as  superstitious  and  antichristian  ;  and  from 
which,  as  Mason  says,  they  had  pared  away  so 
many  superfluities  ;  yea,  so  many,  as  even  to 
pare  out  the  very  name,  itself,  of  bishop  ?  Let 
the  impartial  reader  consider  these  things. 

How  our  present  pretended  bishops  them- 
selves will  make  all  these  things  agree,  will 
be  hard  to  imagine  ;  which,  if  they  cannot  do, 
let  them  be  content  to  leave  us  to  our  own 
liberties,  and  freedom  of  thought ;  and  to  excuse 
us,  if  we  freely  affirm,  that  "  Matthew  Parker 
was  never  consecrated  at  Lambeth  :  that  the 
said  records  are  forged  :  and,  that  themselves 
are  but  mere  laymen,  without  mission,  without 
succession,  and  without  consecration." 

Ninthly,  it  is  none  of  the  least  objections 
against  Parker's  solemn  consecration  at  Lam- 
beth, that  we  find  it  not  once  mentioned  by  the 
historians  of  those  times,  especially  by  John 
Stow,  who  professed  so  particular  a  kindness 
and  respect  for  Parker  ;  and  who  was  so  exact 
in  setting  down  all  things,  of  far  less  moment, 
done  about  London.  Doubtless,  he  omitted  it 
not  through  negligence  or  forgetfulness,  seeing 
he  is  not  unmindful  to  set  down  the  consecration 
of  cardinal  Pole,  Parker's  immediate  prede- 
cessor, and  the  very  day  on  which  he  said  his 
first  mass.  Nor  does  it  appear  to  have  been 
through  forgetfulness,  that  Hollinshead  men- 
tions not  this  notorious  Lambeth  solemnity, 
seeing  he  tells  us,  that  bishop  Tunstal,  who  died 
under  Parker's  custody,  "  received  his  consecra- 
tion at  Lambeth  :"  if  either  he  or  John  Stow  had 
but  given  us  only  such  a  short  hint  as  this,  of 
Parker's  consecration  at  Lambeth,  we  should 
never  have  questioned  it  further,  nor  have 
doubted  of  the  truth  of  it,  though  they  had  not 
been  so  exact  to  a  hair  in  every  punctilio,  as  to 
have  told  us  of  the  chapel's  being  "  adorned 


96 


CONSIDERATIONS  ON  THE 


with  tapestry  towards  the  east ;  a  red  cloth  on 
the  floor,  in  advent ;  a  sermon,  communion, 
concourse  of  people ;  Miles  Coverdale's  side 
woollen  gown  ;  of  the  queen's  sending  to  see  if 
all  things  had  been  rightly  performed."  What 
care  was  here  taken  ?  "  Of  answer  being 
brought  her,  that  there  was  not  a  little  amiss, 
only  Miles  Coverdale  was  in  his  side  woollen 
gown,  at  the  very  minute  of  the  consecration : 
of  their  assuring  her  that  that  could  not  cause 
any  defect  in  the  consecration,"  &c,  as  our 
records  mention  ;  which  ridiculous  circum- 
stances render  them  not  a  whit  the  more  cre- 
dible, (a) 

If  now,  from  what  has  been  said,  these 
Lambeth  records  appear  evidently  to  be  forged, 
to  what  other  refuge  will  these  pretenders  to 
episcopacy  have  recourse  for  their  episcopal 
character,  but  to  queen  Elizabeth's  letters 
patent,  and  an  act  of  parliment  ?  If  so,  I  see 
no  great  reason  why  they  should  find  fault  with 
their  ancient  name  and  title  of  parliamentary 
bishops.  Whoever  read  of  bishops,  between 
St.  Peter's  time  and  Parker's,  that  stood  in  need 
of  an  act  of  parliament  to  declare  them  such  ? 
Doubtless,  if  they  had  been  consecrated  at 
Lambeth  by  imposition  of  the  hands  of  true 
bishops,  though  all  their  consecrators  had  been 
in  side  woollen  gowns,  and  neither  tapestry 
towards  the  east,  nor  red  cloth  on  the  floor  of 
the  chapel,  and  could  have  shown  authentic 
records  of  the  same,  they  would  never  have 
desired  the  queen  to  make  and  declare  them 
bishops  by  act  of  parliament :  nor  would  the 
queen,  and  the  wisdom  of  the  nation,  have  con- 
sented to  the  marking  of  such  a  superfluous 
act,  if  their  reverences  had  desired  it.  No  !  no  ! 
there  would  have  been  no  more  need  of  any  such 
act  for  them  then,  than  there  had  been  for 
three  score  and  nine  preceding  archbishops  of 
Canterbury. 

After  all  this,  another  query  will  yet  arise  ; 
to  wit,  by  what  form  of  consecration  Matthew 
Parker  was  consecrated  ?  Our  present  prelates 
and  clergy  will  not  say,  I  suppose,  that  he  was 
made  bishop  according  to  the  Roman  Catholic 
form,  though  queen  Elizabeth  had  revived  the 
act  of  25  Henry  VIII.,  20,  which  authorized 
the  same.  Nor  can  they  say  that  king  Ed- 
ward the  Vlth's  form  was  then  in  being,  in  the 
eve  of  the  law  ;  for  that  part  of  the  act  of 
Edward  the  Vlth  which  established  the  book  of 
ordination,  having  been  repealed  by  queen  Mary, 
was  not  revived  till  six  years  after  the  pretended 
consecration  of  Matthew  Parker,  viz.,  till  the 
8th  of  Elizabeth,  as  is  easily  proved.  For 
whereas  the  act  of  5th  and  6th  Edward  VI..  1, 
consisted  of  two  parts  ;  one,  which  authorized 
the  book  of  common  prayer,  as  it  was  then 
newly  explained  and  perfected  ;  another  which 
established  the  form  of  consecrated  bishops,  &c. 
and  added  to  the  book  of  common  prayer. 
This  act,  as  to  both  these  parts,  was  repealed  by 
queen  Mary  ;  and   this  repeal  was  reversed  by 

(a)  Several  ridiculous  circumstances  mentioned  in  the 
Records,  which  yet  render  them  less  credible. 


1  Elizabeth  I.,  as  to  that  part  which  concerned 
the  book  of  common  prayer  only  ;  for  so  ;uns 
the  act,  "  The  said  statute  of  repeal,  and  every 
thing  therein  contained,  only,  concerning  the 
said  book,  viz.  of  common  prayer,  authorized 
by  Edward  VI.  shall  be  void,  and  of  no  effect." 
And  afterwards,  8th  Elizabeth  I.  was  revived 
that  other  part  of  it,  which  concerned  the  form 
of  ordination,  viz.,  in  these  words,  "  Such  order 
and  form  for  the  consecrating  of  archbishops, 
bishops,  &c,  as  was  set  forth  in  the  time  of 
Edward  VI.  and  added  to  the  said  book  of  com- 
mon prayer,  and  authorized  5th  and  6th  of 
Edward  VI.  shall  stand,  and  be  in  full  force  ; 
and  shall  from  henceforth  be  used  and  observed." 
By  which  it  is  as  clear  as  the  sun  at  noon-day, 
that  Edward  the  Vlth's  form  was  not  restored 
at  all  by  1  Elizabeth,  either  expressly  or  in 
general  terms,  under  the  name  and  notion  of 
the  book  of  common  prayer,  as  Protestants 
would  have  it  thought.  Nay  rather,  it  was 
formally  excluded  by  the  said  act,  1  Elizabeth. 
For  that  act  of  Edward  VI.  consisting  of 
nothing  else  but  the  authorizing  of  the  book 
of  common  prayer,  and  establishing,  and  adding 
to  it  the  book  of  ordination ;  and  the  act  of 
queen  Mary  having  repealed  that  whole  act,  as  to 
both  these  parts,  that  act  of  1  Eliz.  reversing  that 
repeal,  as  to  the  book  of  common  prayer  only, 
did  plainly  and  directly  exclude  the  repealing  of 
it,  as  to  the  book  of  ordination  ;  there  being 
nothing  else  to  be  excluded,  by  that  word  only, 
but  that  book.  So  that  it  is  undeniably  evident, 
that  king  Edward  the  Vlth's  form  of  consecra- 
tion was  at  that  day  illegal.  And  must  we 
imagine,  that  the  queen  would  suffer  her  new 
bishops  to  be  consecrated  by  an  illegal  form, 
when  she  could  as  easily  have  authorized  it  by 
the  law,  as  she  had  done  the  Roman  form,  by 
reviving  the  act  25th  Henry  VIII.  20th  ?  Yea, 
it  had  been  as  easy  to  make  that  form  legal,  as 
it  was  afterwards  to  declare  them  bishops  by 
act  of  parliament ;  and  doubtless,  more  com- 
mendable. 

But  admit  Matthew  Parker,  and  the  rest  of 
queen  Elizabeth's  new  bishops,  were  made  such 
by  this,  then  illegal,  form  ;  yet,  if  this  form 
prove  invalid,  they  are  but  still  where  they  were 
before  their  election,  as  to  their  character. 
And  that  it  is  invalid,  is  sufficiently  and  clearly 
proved  by  the  learned  author  of  Erastus  Senior, 
to  Avhom  I  will  refer  my  reader.  Yea,  the 
Protestant  bishops  and  clergy  themselves  have 
judged  the  said  form  to  be  invalid ;  and  there- 
fore thought  necessary  to  repair  the  essential 
defects  of  the  same,  by  adding  the  words  bishop 
and  priest.  Essential  defects,  I  call  the  want 
of  these  two  words  bishop  and  priest ;  for  if 
they  had  not  been  essential,  why  were  they 
added  1  Yet  this  will  not  serve  their  turn  ;  for 
before  they  can  have  a  true  clergy,  they  must 
change  the  character  of  the  ordainers,  as  well 
as  the  form  of  ordination.  A  valid  form  of 
ordination,  pronounced  by  a  minister  not  validly 
ordained,  gives  no  more  character  than  if  it  had 
continued  still  invalid,  and  never  been  altered. 
The  present  Protestant  bishops,  whe    changed 


LAMBETH  RECORDS. 


the  form  of  their  own  consecration,  upon  their 
adversaries'  objections  of  the  invalidity  thereof, 
(for  immediately  after  Erastus  Senior  was  pub- 
lished against  it,  they  altered  it,  viz  ,  anno 
1662,)  might  as  well  submit  to  be  ordained  by 
Catholic  bishops  ;  or  else,  with  the  Presby- 
terians, utterly  deny  an  episcopal  character,  as 
allow,  by  altering  the  form  after  so  long  a  time 
and  dispute,  that  it  was  not  sufficient  to  make 
themselves,  and  their  predecessors,  priests  and 
bishops. 

What  has  hitherto  been  said,  concerning  the 
nullity  of  their  character,  is  yet  further  con- 
firmed by  their  altering  the  25th  of  their  39 
Articles  ;  for  these  first  bishops,  Parker,  Horn, 
Jewel,  Grindall,  &c,  understanding  the  condi- 
tion in  which  they  were,  for  want  of  consecra- 
tion by  imposition  of  hands,  resolved  in  their 
convocation,  anno  1562,  to  publish  the  39 
Articles,  made  by  Cranmer  and  his  associates, 
but  with  some  alteration  and  addition  ;  especially 
to  that  Article  wherein  they  speak  of  the  sacra- 
ments :  for, 

Whereas  Cranmer's  25th  or  26th  Article  says 
nothing  of  holy  orders  by  imposition  of  hands, 
or  any  visible  sign  or  ceremony  required 
therein  ;  Parker,  and  his  bishops,  having  taken 
upon  themselves  that  calling,  without  any  such 
ceremony  of  imposition  and  episcopal  hands,  for 
I  believe  they  set  not  much  by  John  Scorcy's 
hands  and  Bible  in  the  Nag's  Head,  declared, 
that  "  God  ordained  not  any  visible  sign  or 
ceremony  for  the  five  last,  commonly  called 
sacraments  ;"  whereof  holy  orders  is  one.  This 
alteration  and  addition  you  may  see  in  Doctor 
Heylin's  appendix  to  Ecclcsia  Restaurata,  page 
189.  In  this  convocation  they  denied  also  holy 
orders  to  be  a  sacrament ;  consequently  not 
likely  to  impress  any  indelible  character  in  the 
soul  of  the  party  ordained  ;  which  doctrine  con- 
tinued long  among  them,  as  appears  by  Mr. 
Rogers,  in  bis  defence  of  the  39  Articles,  who 
affirms,  that  "  none  but  disorderly  Papists  will 
say  that  order  is  a  sacrament  ;"  and  demands, 
"  Where  can  it  be  seen  in  holy  scripture,  that 
orders  or  priesthood  is  a  sacrament  ?  what  form 
has  it  ?  (says  he)  what  promise  ?  what  institution 
from  Christ  ?"(a)  But  after  they  began  to 
pretend  to  have  received  an  episcopal  character 
from  Roman  Catholic  bishops,  an  I  to  put  out 
their  Lambeth  Records  in  defence  of  it,  they 
disliked  this  doctrine,  and  taught  the  contrary, 
viz.,  that  ordination  is  a  sacrament.  "  We 
deny  not  ordination  to  be  a  sacrament,"  says 
Doctor  Bramhall, "  though  it  be  not  one  of 
these  two  which  are  generally  necessary  to  sal- 
vation."^) 

By  order  of  this  convocation  the  Bible  of 
1562  was  printed,  where  the  aforesaid  text, 
li  When  they  had  ordained  to  them  priests,"  &c, 
was  translated,  "  When  they  had  ordained  elders 
by  election ;"  which,  as  soon  as  they  began  to 
thirst  after  the  glorious  character  of  priests  and 
bishops,  they  corrected. 

(a)  Defence  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles,  pp.  154,  155- 

(b)  See  Mason  and  Dr.  Brani.,  p.  97. 


97 

And  though  Cranmer  cared  as  little  for  any 
visible  signs,  imposition  of  hands,  or  ceremonies 
in  ordination,  as  the  other  first  Protestant  refor- 
mers, and  according  to  their  practice  had 
abjured  the  priestly  and  episcopal  character, 
which  he  had  received  among  Catholics  ;  as  may 
be  gathered  by  his  words,  related  by  Fox  in  his 
degradation,  thus  :  "  Then  a  barber  clipped  his 
hair  round  about,  and  the  bishop  scraped  the  tops 
of  his  fingers,  where  he  had  been  anointed. "(c) 
When  they  were  thus  doing  ;  "  All  this,"  quoth 
the  archbishop,  "  needed  not,  I  had  myself  done 
witli  this  geer  long  ago."  And  also  by  his 
doctrine ;  that,  "  In  the  New  Testament,  he 
that  is  appointed  to  be  a  priest  or  bishop,  needs 
no  confirmation  by  the  scripture  ;  for  election 
thereunto  is  sufficient."  Though,  I  say,  Cran- 
mer valued  not  any  episcopal  consecration, 
which  he  had  received  in  the  Catholic  Church, 
yet  he  presumed  not  to  make  the  denial  thereof 
an  article  of  the  Protestant  faith ;  but  queen 
Elizabeth's  pretended  bishops,  and  English 
Church,  in  their  convocation  1562,  seeing,  they 
knew  they  had  no  episcopal  character  by  impo- 
sition of  true  bishops'  hands,  thought  fit,  to 
make  it  a  part  of  the  Protestant  belief,  "  That 
no  such  visible  sign  or  ceremony  was  necessary, 
or  instituted  by  Christ  ;"  and  therefore  con- 
cluded holy  orders  not  to  be  a  sacrament.  And 
though,  I  say,  the  Church  of  England  now 
teaches  and  practises  the  contrary,  and  in  king 
James  the  First's  reign  erased  from  the  text  the 
word  election  as  an  imposture,  or  gross  cor- 
ruption, yet  this  change  of  the  matter  does  no 
more  make  them  now  true  priests  and  bishops, 
than  their  last  change  of  the  form  of  ordination, 
in  the  year  1662,  soon  after  the  happy  restoration 
of  king  Charles  the  Second. 

'•  Ecclesia  non  est,  qua  sacerdotem  non  habet. 

There  can  be  no  church  without  priests." — St.  Jerom. 

It  is  enough,  that  in  this  place  we  have  proved 
these  men  without  consecration  or  ordination  ; 
yet  seeing  they  glory  also  in  assuming  to  them- 
selves the  name  of  pastors,  pastor  of  St.  Mar- 
tin's, &.C.,  it  may  not  be  unseasonable  to  propose 
a  few  queries,  touching  their  pastoral  jurisdic- 
tion. 

1 .  Whether  it  is  not  a  power  of  the  keys,  to 
institute  a  pastor  over  a  flock  of  clergy  and 
people  ? 

2.  Whether  any  but  a  pastor  can  give  pas- 
toral jurisdiction  ? 

3.  Whether  any  bishop,  but  the  bishop  of  the 
diocese,  or  commissioned  from  him,  or  his 
superior,  can  validly  institute  a  pastor  to  any 
parochial  church,  within  such  a  diocese  1 

4.  Whether  any  number  of  bishops  can  validly 
confirm,  or  give  pastoral  jurisdiction  to  the 
bishop  of  any  diocese,  if  the  metropolitan,  or 
some  authorized  by  him,  or  his  superior,  be 
not  one  ? 

5.  Or  to  the  metropolitan  of  a  province,  if  the 


(c)  Fox's  Acts  and  Monuments,  fol.  216. 


98 


PROTESTANT  TRANSLATION  AGAINST 


primate  of  the  nation,  or  some  authorized  by  him, 
or  his  superior  be  not  one  ? 

6.  Whether  any  but  the  chief  patriarch  of  that 
part  of  the  world,  or  authorized  by  him,  can 
validly  give'  pastoral  jurisdiction  to  the  primate 
of  a  nation  ? 

7.  Whether  the  bishop  of  Rome  is  not  chief 
patriarch  of  the  western  church,  consequently 
of  this  nation  1 

8.  Whether  Mat.  Parker,  the  first  Protestant 
pretended  archbishop  of  Canterbury,  received 
his  pastoral  jurisdiction  from  the  bishop  of 
Rome,  or  from  others  by  him  authorized  1 
or, 

9.  Whether  those  who  made  Mat.  Parker 
primate  of  England,  or  archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury, had  any  jurisdiction  to  that  act,  but  what 
they  received  from  queen  Elizabeth  ? 

10.  Whether  queen  Elizabeth  had  the  power 
of  the  keys,  either  of  order  or  jurisdiction  1 

1 1 .  Whether  it  is  not  an  essential  part  of  the 
Catholic  Church  to  have  pastors  ? 

12.  Whether  salvation  can  be  had  in  a  church 
wanting  pastors  ? 


13.  Whether  they  do  not  commit  a  most 
heinous  sacrilege,  who  having  neither  valid 
ordination,  nor  pastoral  jurisdiction,  do  notwith- 
standing take  upon  them  to  administer  sacra- 
ments, and  exercise  all  other  acts  of  episcopal 
and  priestly  functions  ? 

14.  Whether  the  people  are  not  also  involved 
with  them,  in  the  same  sin,  so  often  as  they 
communicate  with  them  in,  or  co-operate  to, 
those  sacrilegious  presumptions  ? 

1 5.  Whether  those,  who  assume  to  themselves 
the  names  and  offices  of  bishops  and  priests, 
take  upon  them  to  teach,  preach,  administer 
sacraments,  and  perform  all  other  episcopal  and 
priestly  functions,  without  vocation,  without 
ordination,  without  consecration,  without  suc- 
cession, without  mission,  or  without  pastoral 
jurisdiction,  are  not  the  very  men  of  whom  our 
blessed  Saviour  charged  us  to  beware  1  (a) 

16.  To  conclude,  whether  it  is  wisdom  in  the 
people  of  England,  to  hire  such  men  at  the 
charge  of  perhaps  above  .£1,000,000  [query,  now 
3  or  .£"4,000,000  ?]  per  annum,  to  lead  them  the 
broad  way  to  perdition  ? 


ANOTHER  CORRUPT  ADDITION  AGAINST  THE  PERPETUAL  SACRIFICE  OF 

CHRIST'S  BODY  AND  BLOOD. 


Protestants  teach,  in  the  31st  of  the  39 
Articles,  "  That  the  offering  of  Christ  once  made, 
is  that,  perfect  redemption,  propitiation  and 
satisfaction  for  all  the  sins  of  the  whole  world, 
&c.  Wherefore  the  sacrifice  of  masses,  in 
which  it  was  commonly  said,  that  the  priests  did 
offer  Christ  for  the  quick  and  the  dead,  to  have 
remission  of  pain  and  guilt,  were  blasphemous 
fables,  and  dangerous  deceits."  By  this  doctrine 
the  Church  of  England  bereaves  Christians  of 
the  most  inestimable  jewel  and  richest  treasure, 
that  ever  Christ  our  Saviour  left  to  his  church  ; 
to  wit,  the  most  holy  and  venerable  sacrifice  of 
his  sacred  body  and  blood  in  the  mass,  which  is 
daily  offered  to  God  the  Father,  for  a  propitia- 
tion for  our  sins.  And  because  they  would 
have  this  false  and  erroneous  doctrine  of  their's 
backed  by  sacred  scripture,  they  mostegregiously 
corrupt  the  text,  Heb.  x.  10,  by  adding  to  the 
same  two  words  not  found  in  the  Greek  or 
Latin  copies,  viz.,  "  For  all ;"  the  apostle's  words 
being,  "  In  the  which  will  we  are  sanctified  by 
the  oblation  of  the  body  of  Jesus  Christ  once  ;" 
which  they  corruptly  read,  in  their  last  transla- 
tion :  "  By  the  which  will  we  are  sanctified, 
through  the  offering  of  the  body  of  Jesus  Christ 
once,  for  all."  By  which  addition  they  endea- 
vour to  take  away  the  daily  oblation  of  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ  in  the  holy  sacrifice 
of  the  mass  ;  contradicting  the  doctrine  of  God's 
holy  church,  which  believes  and  teaches,  "  that 
our  Lord  God,  although  he  was  once  to  offer 
himself  to  God  the  Father  upon  the  altar  of  the 
cross  by  death,  that  he  might  there  work  eternal 
redemption  ;  yet  because  his  priesthood  was  not 
to  be  extinguished  by  death,  in  the  last  supper, 


which  night  he  was  to  be  betrayed,  that  he  might 
leave  a  visible  sacrifice  to  his  beloved  spouse  the 
church,  whereby  that  bloody  one,  once  to  be 
performed  upon  the  cross,  should  be  represented, 
and  the  memory  thereof  should  remain  to  the 
end  of  the  world,  and  the  wholesome  virtue 
thereof  should  be  applied  for  the  remission  of 
those  sins  which  we  daily  commit,  declaring 
himself  to  be  ordained  a  priest  for  ever,  ac- 
cording to  the  order  of  Melchizedek,  he  offered 
to  God  the  Father  his  body  and  blood,  under 
the  forms  of  bread  and  wine  ;  and  under  the 
signs  of  the  same  things  he  gave  it  to  the  apos- 
tles, whom  then  he  ordained  priests  of  the  New 
Testament,  that  they  should  receive  it  ;  and  by 
the  words  he  commanded  them,  and  their  suc- 
cessors in  the  priesthood,  that  they  should  offer 
it  :  "  Do  ye  this  in  commemoration  of  me,"  &c. 
And,  "  Because  in  this  divine  sacrifice,  which 
is  performed  in  the  mass,  the  self-same  Christ  is 
contained,  and  unbloodily  offered,  who  offered 
himself  once  bloodily  upon  the  altar  of  the  cross  : 
the  holy  synod  teaches  the  sacrifice  to  be  truly 
propitiatory,  &c.  Wherefore,  according  to  the 
tradition  of  the  apostles,  it  is  duly  offered,  not 
only  for  the  sins,  punishments,  satisfactions,  and 
other  necessities  of  the  faithful  that  are  living, 
but  also  for  such  as  are  dead  in  Christ,  as  not  yet 
fully  purged. "(i)  This  is  the  Catholic  doc- 
trine, delivered  in  the  sacred  Council  of  Trent, 
which  the  Church  of  England  calls  blasphemous 
fables,  and  dangerous  deceits  ;  and  against 
which  they  falsify  the  sacred  text  of  scripture, 

(a)  Mat.  vii.  15. 

(b)  Concil.  Trid.,  sess.  22,  cap.  1,  cap.  2, 


THE    PERPETUAL    SACRIFICE. 


99 


by  thrusting  into  it  words  of  their  own,  which 
they  find  not  in  any  of  the  Greek  or  Latin 
copies. 

But  lest  they  may  object,  that  this  is  but  a 
new  doctrine,  not  taught  in  the  primitive  church, 
nor  delivered  down  to  us  by  the  apostles  or  by 
apostolical  tradition ;  I  will  give  you  these  fol- 
lowing testimonies  from  the  fathers  of  the  first 
five  hundred  years. 

St.  Cyprian  says,  (a)  "  Christ  is  priest  for 
ever,  according  to  the  order  of  Melchizedek, 
which  order  is  this,  coming  from  this  sacrifice, 
and  thence  descending,  that  Melchizedek  was 
priest  of  God  most  high,  that  he  ofTered  bread 
and  wine,  that  he  blessed  Abraham  ;  for  who  is 
more  a  priest  of  God  most  high,  than  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  who  ofTered  sacrifice  to  God  the 
Father,  and  offered  the  same  that  Melchizedek 
had  offered,  bread  and  wine,  viz.,  his  body  and 
blood  P 

And  a  little  after  :  "  That  therefore  in  Gene- 
sis the  blessing  might  be  rightly  celebrated  about 
Abraham  by  Melchizedek  the  priest,  the  image, 
or  figure  of  Chrst's  sacrifice,  consisting  in 
bread  and  wine,  went  before  :  which  thing  our 
Lord  perfecting  and  performing,  offered  bread, 
and  the  chalice  mixed  with  wine,  and  he,  that  is 
the  plenitude,  fulfilled  the  verity  of  the  prefi- 
gured image." 

The  same  holy  father,  in  another  place,  as 
cited  also  by  the  Magdeburgian  Centurists,  (Z>) 
in  this  manner,  "  Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,"  says 
Cyprian,  lib.  2,  ep.  3,  "  is  the  high  priest  of 
God  the  Father  ;  and  first  offered  sacrifice  to  God 
the  Father,  and  commanded  the  same  to  be  done 
in  rememberance  to  him ;  and  that  priest  truly 
executes  Christ's  place,  who  imitates  that  which 
Christ  did ;  and  then  he  offers  in  the  church  a 
true  and  full  sacrifice  to  God."  This  saying  so 
displeases  the  Centurists,  that  they  say,  "  Cy- 
prian affirms  superstitiously,  that  the  priest 
executes  Christ's  place  in  the  supper  of  our 
Lord." 

St.  Hierom  :  (c)  "  Have  recourse,"  says  he, 
"  to  the  book  of  Genesis,  and  you  shall  find 
Melchizedek,  king  of  Salem,  prince  of  this  city, 
who  even  there,  in  figure  of  Christ,  offered 
bread  and  wine,  and  dedicated  the  Christian 
mystery  in  our  Saviour's  body  and  blood." 
Again,  "  Melchizedek  offered  not  bloody  vic- 
tims, but  dedicated  the  sacrament  of  Christ  in 
bread  and  wine,  a  simple  and  pure  sacrifice." 
And  yet  more  plainly  in  another  place,  "  Our 
ministry,"  says  he,  "  is  signified  in  the  word  of 
order,  not  by  Aaron,  in  immolating  brute  vic- 
tims, but  in  offering  bread  and  wine,  that  is,  the 
body  and  blood  of  our  Lord  Jesus." 

St.  Augustine  expressly  teaches,  that  "  Mel- 
chizedek bringing  forth  the  sacrament,  or 
mystery,  of  our  Lord's  table,  knew  how  to 
figure    his    eternal    priesthood."    (d)    "  There 

(a)  Ep.  53,  ad  Caecilium. 

(b)  In  the  Alphab.  Table  of  the  Third  Cent.,  under  the 
letter  S.,  col.  83. 

(c)  Ep.  ad  Marcel,  ut  migret.  Bethleem. ;  Ep.  ad  Evagr. 
Gluaest.  in  Gen.,  c.  14. 

(d)  Ep.  95. 


first  appeared,"  says  he  in  another  place,  "that 
sacrifice  which  is  now  offered  to  God  by  Chris- 
tians, in  the  whole  world."  (e) 

Again,  (Cone.  1,  in  Psal.  xxxv.)  "There  was 
formerly,"  says  he,  "  as  you  have  known,  the 
sacrifice  of  the  Jews,  according  to  the  order  of 
Aaron,  in  the  sacrifice  of  beasts,  and  this  in 
mystery  ;  for  not  as  yet  was  the  sacrifice  of  the 
body  and  blood  of  our  Lord,  which  the  faithful 
know,  and  such  as  have  read  the  Gospel ;  which 
sacrifice  now  is  spread  over  the  whole  world. 
Set  therefore  before  your  eyes  two  sacrifices, 
that  according  to  the  order  of  Aaron ;  and  this, 
according  to  the  order  of  Melchizedek  ;  for  it  is 
written,  our  Lord  has  sworn,  and  it  shall  not 
repent  him,  thou  art  a  priest  for  ever,  according 
to  the  order  of  Melchizedek."  And  in  Cone. 
2,  Psal.  xxxiii.,  he  expressly  teaches,  "that 
Christ,  of  his  body  and  blood,  instituted  a  sacri- 
fice, according  to  the  order  of  Melchizedek." 

Nothing  can  be  more  plain  than  these  words 
of  St.  Irenaeus,  in  which  he  affirms  of  Christ, 
(/)  "  Giving  counsel  also  to  his  disciples,  to 
offer  the  first  fruits  of  his  creatures  to  God  ;  not 
as  it  were  needing  it,  but  that  they  might  be 
neither  unfruitful  nor  ungrateful,  he  himself 
took  of  the  creature  of  bread,  and  gave  thanks, 
saying,  this  is  my  body  ;  and  likewise  the  chalice, 
he  confessed  to  be  his  blood,  which  is  made  of 
that  creature  which  is  in  use  amongst  us,  and 
taught  a  new  oblation  of  the  New  Testament, 
which  oblation  the  church  receiving  from  the 
apostles,  throughout  the  whole  world,  offers  to 
God,  to  him  who  gives  us  nourishment,  the  first 
fruits  of  his  gifts  in  the  New  Testament ;  of 
whom,  amongst  the  twelve  prophets,  Malachy 
has  thus  foretold :  '  I  have  no  will  in  you,  the 
Jews,  says  our  omnipotent  Lord,  and  I  will 
take  no  sacrifices  at  your  hands,  because,  from 
the  rising  of  the  sun  to  the  setting  thereof,  my 
name  is  glorified  amongst  the  Gentiles ;  and  in 
every  place,  incense  is  offered  to  my  name,  and 
a  pure  sacrifice,  because  my  name  is  groat 
among  the  Gentiles,  saith  our  Lord  Almighty,' 
manifestly  signifying  by  these  things,  because 
the  former  people  indeed  ceased  to  oiler  to  God  ; 
but  in  everyplace  a  sacrifice  is  offered  to  God,  and 
this  purr,  for  his  name  is  glorified  among  the 
Gentiles."  Thus  St.  Irenaeus,  whose  words  so 
touch  the  Protestant  Centurists,  that  they  say, 
"  Irenaeus,  &c,  seems  to  speak  very  incommo- 
diously, when  he  says,  he,  Christ,  taught  the 
new  oblation  of  the  New  Testament,  which  the 
church  receiving  from  the  apostles,  offered  to 
God  over  all  the  world." 

Eusebius  Caesariensis :  (g)  "  We  sacrifice, 
therefore,  to  our  highest  Lord  a  sacrifice  of 
praise  ;  we  sacrifice  to  God  a  full,  odoriferous, 
and  most  holy  sacrifice  ;  we  sacrifice  after  a  new 
manner,  according  to  the  New  Testament,  a 
pure  HOST." 

St.  John  Chrysostom  expounding  the  words  of 

(e)  Lib.  16,  de  Civ.  Dei,  c.  22.  See  him  also  lib.  17,  c.  17, 
and  lib.  18,  c.  35;  cum  Psalm  cix.,  lib.  1,  contr.  Ad  vers. 
Leg.  et  Prophet,  c.  20 :  Serm.  4,  de  Sanctis  Innocentibus, 

(/)  Lib.  4,  Advers.  Haer.,  c.  32. 

{g)  Lib.  1,  Demonstrat.  Evan.,  c.  10. 


100 


PROTESTANT   TRANSLATION   AGAINST 


the  prophet  Malachy,  says,  (a)  "  The  church, 
which  every  where  carries  about  Christ  in  it,  is 
prohibited  from  no  place ;  but  in  every  place  there 
are  altars,  in  every  place  doctrines  ;  these  things 
God  foretold  by  his  prophet,  for  both  declaring 
the  church's  sincerity,  and  the  ingratitude  of  the 
other  people,  the  Jews,  he  tells  them,  I  have  no 
pleasure  in  you,  &c.  Mark,  how  clearly  and 
plainly  he  interprets  the  mystical  table,  which  is 
the  unbloody  host,  and  the  pure  perfume  he  calls 
holy  prayers,  which  are  offered  after  the  host. 
Thou  seest  how  it  is  granted,  that  that  angelical 
sacrifice  should  every  where  be  known  ;  thou 
seest  it  is  circumscribed  with  no  limits,  neither 
the  altars,  nor  the  song.  In  every  place  incense 
is  offered  to  my  name  ;  therefore  the  mystical 
table,  the  heavenly  and  exceedingly  venerable 
sacrifice  is  indeed  the  prime  pure  host." 

Is  it  not  a  thing  to  be  admired,  that  the 
Church  of  England  should  not  only  corrupt  the 
sacred  scriptures  against  the  great  and  most 
dreadful  sacrifice  ;  but  should  also  make  it  an 
article  of  her  faith,  that  it  is  a  blasphemous 
fable,  and  dangerous  deceit  ?  When,  without 
all  doubt,  she  cannot  be  ignorant,  that  the  holy 
fathers  call  it :  (b)  "  A  visible  sacrifice ;  (c) 
"  The  sacrifice  ;"  (d)  "  The  daily  sacrifice  ;" 
(e)  "  The  true  sacrifice  according  to  the  order  of 
Melchizedek;"(/)  "The  sacrifice  of  the  body 
and  blood  of  Christ ;"  (g)  "  The  sacrifice  of  the 
altar ;"  (h)  "  The  sacrifice  of  the  church  ;  (i) 
"  The  sacrifice  of  the  New  Testament ;"  (k) 
"  Which  succeeded  to  all  sacrifices  of  the  Old 
Testament."  And  that  it  was  offered  for  the 
health  of  the  emperor,  Saerificamus  pro  salute  im- 
peratoris"  says  Tertullian,  de  Scapul.  c.  2.  That 
it  was  offered  for  the  sick,  Pro  infirmis  etiam  sae- 
rificamus, says  St.  Chrysostom,  Horn.  27,  in  Act 
Apos.  "  For  those  upon  the  sea,  and  for  the  fruits 
of  the  earth,"  idem.  And  for  the  purging  of  houses 
infected  with  wicked  spirits.  St.  Aug.  de  Civit. 
Die,  lib.  22,  c.  8,  says,  that  "  One  went  and  of- 
fered," in  the  house  infected,  "  the  sacrifice  of 
Christ's  body,  praying  that  the  vexation  might 
cease,  and  by  God's  mercy  it  ceasedimmediately." 

In  the  first  Council  of  Nice,  can.  14,  we  find 
these  words :  "  The  holy  council  has  been  in- 
formed, that  in  some  places  and  cities  the  dea- 
cons distribute  the  sacrament  to  priests  ;  neither 
rule  nor  custom  has  delivered,  that  they  who 
have  not  power  to  offer  sacrifice,  should  distri- 
bute the  body  of  Christ  to  them  who  offer." 
See  also,  .concil.    3,   Bracarense.   can.    3,    and 

(a)  Ad.  Psal.  xcv. 

(b)  St.  Agu.,  de  Civit.  Dei,  lib.  10,  c.   19. 

(c)  St.  Cypr.  1.  2,  ep.  3;  et  St.  Agu.  Cit.  c.  20. 

(d)  Aug.  Cit.  c.  16,  et.  Cone.  Tolet.,  I.  can. 5 ;  Origen.  in 
Num.  Horn.  23. 

(e)  St.  Cyprian,  1.  2,  <!p.  3,  et  Aug.,  lib.  16,  c.  22,  de 
Civit.  Dei. 

(/)  Et  lib.  22,  c.  8,  et  lib.  20,  contr.  Faustum,  c.  18 ;  et 
S.  Hierom.,  lib.  3,  contr.  Pelag.;  Aug.  in  Psal.  xxxiii,  con. 
2.  to.  8;  et  St.  Crys.,  lib.  1,  Cor.  Horn,  24. 

(jg)  S.Aug,  in  Enchiridion,  c.  H0,etdeCura  pro  Mor- 
tuis.  c.  18. 

(A)  Et  de  Civit.  Dei,  1.  10,  c.  20. 

(t)  Et  de  Gratia  Novi  Test.,  c.  18,  et  S.  Irenagus,  lib.  4, 
c.  32. 

(k)  Aug  de  Civit.  Dei,  lib.  17,  c.  20.;  St.  Clement,  in 
Apost.  Constit.,  edit.  1564,  Antverpia1,  lib.  6,  c.  22,  fol.  123. 


concil.  12,  can.  5.  Moreover  that  "this  holy 
sacrifice,"  as  God's  church  at  this  day  teaches 
and  practises,  "  was  offered  for  the  sins  of  the 
living  and  dead,"  is  a  truth  so  undeniable,  that 
Crastoius,  a  learned  Protestant,  in  his  book  of 
the  mass,  against  Bellarmin,  page  167,  repre- 
hends Origen,  St.  Athanasius,  St.  Ambrose, 
St.  Chrysostom,  St.  Augustine,  St  Gregory 
the  Great,  and  venerab'e  Bede,  for  maintaining 
"  the  mass  to  be  a  propitiatory  sacrifice  for  the 
sins  of  the  living  and  of  the  dead."  Consider 
then,  what  truth  there  is  in  the  words  of  that 
author  (I)  who  affirms,  that  in  Gregory  the 
Great's  time,  "  Masses  for  the  dead  were  not 
intended  to  deliver  souls  from  those  torments  of 
purgatory."  Doubtless  he  considered  not  the 
words  of  St.  Augustine,  lib.  9,  Confess,  c.  12, 
and  De  Verb.  Apost.  Serm.  34,  viz.  "  That  the 
sacrifice  of  our  price  was  offered  for  his  mother 
Monica,  being  dead,"  and,  "  That  the  universal 
church  does  observe,  as  delivered  from  their 
forefathers,  to  pray  for  the  faithful  deceased  in  the 
sacrifice,  and  also  to  offer  the  sacrifice  for  them." 
Nor  considered  this  great  vindicator,  that  great 
miracle  related  by  St.  Gregory  the  Great,  him- 
self, concerning  purgatory,  and  the  benefits  souls 
there  receive,  by  the  offering  up  of  this  propitia- 
tory sacrifice.  In  his  fourth  Book  of  Dialogues, 
chap.  55,  telling  us  of  a  monk  called  Justus,  who 
was  obsequious  to  him,  and  watched  with  him  in 
his  daily  sickness:  "This  man,"  says  he,  "being 
dead,  I  appointed  the  healthful  host  to  be  offered 
for  his  absolution  thirty  days  together,  which 
done,  the  said  Justus  appeared  to  his  brother  by 
vision,  and  said,  I  have  been  hitherto  evil,  but 
now  am  well,  &c."  And  the  brethren  in  the  mon- 
astery counting  the  days,  found  that  to  be  the  day 
on  which  the  30th  oblation  was  offered  for  him. 

Nor  would  doubtless  this  vindicator  have  told 
us,  "  That  transubstantiation  was  yet  unborn," 
to  wit,  in  St.  Gregory  the  Great's  time,  unless  he 
had  a  mind  to  impose  upon  his  reader,  if  he  had 
ever  read  the  doctrine  of  those  fathers,  who 
lived  before  St.   Gregory's  time,  for  example  : 

St.  Ignatius,  martyr,  in  his  epistle  to  the 
people  of  Smyrna,  speaking  of  the  heretics  of 
his  time,  men  of  the  same  judgment  with  this 
vindicator,  writes  thus  :  "  They  allow  not  of 
eucharists  and  oblations,"  says  he,  "  because 
they  do  not  believe  the  eucharist  to  be  the  flesh 
of  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  which  suffered  for 
our  sins,  and  which  the  Father,  in  his  mercy, 
raised  again  from  the  dead." 

St.  Justin,  martyr,  in  his  apology  to  the  em- 
peror Antonius  Pius,  made  for  the  Christians  : 
"  Now  this  food,"  says  he,  "  amongst  us,  is  called 
the  eucharist,  Avhich  it  is  lawful  for  none  to  par- 
take of,  but  those  who  believe  our  doctrine  to  be 
true,  who  have  been  washed  in  the  laver  of  rege- 
neration for  the  remission  of  sins;  and  who  regu- 
late their  lives  according  to  the  prescription  of 
Christ ;  for  we  do  not  receive  this  as  common 
bread,  or  common  drink  ;  but  as  by  the  word  of 
God,  Jesus  Christ,  our  Redeemer,  being  made 


(Z)  The  author  of  the  Second  Defence  of  the  Exposition 
of  the  Doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England,  &c,  p.  13. 


THE  PERPETUAL  SACRIFICE. 


101 


flesh,  had  both  flesh  and  blood  for  the  sake  of 
our  salvation  ;  just  so  we  are  taught,  that  that 
food,  over  which  thanks  are  given  by  prayers,  in 
his  own  words,  and  whereby  our  blood  and  flesh, 
are  by  a  change,  nourished,  is  the  flesh  and  blood 
of  the  incarnate  Jesus  ;  for  the  apostles,  in  the 
commentaries  written  by  them,  called  the  gos- 
pel, have  recorded  that  Jesus  so  commanded 
them." 

St.  Irenaeus,  taking  an  argument  from  the 
participation  of  the  eucharist,  proves  the  resur- 
rection of  the  flesh,  against  the  heretics  of  his 
time,  (a)  "  As  the  blessed  apostles  say  :  '  Be- 
cause we  are  members  of  his  body,  of  his  flesh, 
and  of  his  bones  ;'  not  speaking  this  of  any 
spiritual  or  invisible  man,  but  of  that  disposition 
which  belongs  to  a  real  man,  that  consists  of 
flesh,  nerves,  and  bones  ;  and  is  nourished  by 
the  chalice,  which  is  his  (Christ's)  blood,  and 
receives  increase  by  that  bread  which  is  his  body. 
And  as  the  vine,  being  planted  in  the  earth, 
brings  forth  fruit  in  season  :  and  a  grain  of 
wheat  falling  upon  the  ground,  and  rotting,  rises 
up  with  increase  by  the  virtue  of  God,  who  com- 
prehends all  things,  which  afterwards,  by  a  pru- 
dent management,  becomes  serviceable  to  men  ; 
and  receiving  the  word  of  God,  are  made  the 
eucharist,  which  is  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ ; 
so  also  our  bodies  being  nourished  by  it,  and 
laid  in  the  earth,  and  there  dissolved,  will  rise 
at  their  time  ;  the  word  of  God  working  in  them 
this  resurrection,  to  the  glory  of  God  the 
Father." 

Eusebius  Canadensis  :  (b)  "  Making  a  daily 
commemoration  of  him  (Christ,)  and  daiiy  cele- 
brating the  memory  of  his  body  and  blood  ;  and 
being  now  preferred  to  a  more  excellent  sacri- 
fice and  office  than  that  of  the  old  law,  we  think 
it  unreasonable  any  more  to  fall  back  to  those 
first  and  weak  elements  which  contained  certain 
signs  and  figures,  but  not  the  truth  itself." 
Another  place  of  Eusebius,  as  quoted  by  St. 
John  of  Damascene  :  "  Many  sinners,"  says  he, 
"  being  priests,  do  offer  sacrifice  ;  neither  docs 
God  deny  his  assistance,  but  by  the  Holy  Ghost 
consecrates  the  proposed  gifts.  And  the  bread 
indeed  is  made  the  precious  body  of  our  Lord, 
and  the  cup  his  precious  blood. "(c) 

St.  Hilary  :  "  We  must  not  speak,"  says  he, 
"  of  the  things  of  God,  like  men,  or  in"  the  sense 
of  the  world  :  let  us  read  what  is  written,  and 
understand  what  we  read,  and  then  we  shall  be- 
lieve with  a  perfect  faith.  For  what  we  say  of 
the  natural  existence  of  Christ  within  us,  if  we 
do  not  learn  from  him,  we  say  foolishly  and 
profanely ;  for  he  himself  says :  '  My  flesh  is 
meat  indeed,  and  my  blood  is  drink  indeed.' 
There  is  no  place  left  for  doubting  of  the  reality 
of  his  flesh  and  blood  ;  for  now,  by  the  profes- 
sion of  Christ  himself,  and  by  our  faith,  it  is 
truly  flesh,  and  truly  blood.  Is  not  this  truth  ? 
It  may  indeed  not  be  true  for  them,  who  deny 
Christ  to  be  true  God."(rf) 

(a)  Lib.  5,  c.  11. 

(b)  Lib.  1,  de  Demonstrat.  Evang.,  c.  10. 

(c)  Lib.  3,  Parallel.,  c  45. 

(d)  Lib.  8,  deTrinitate. 

14 


St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  :(<?)  "  Since,  therefore, 
Christ  himself  does  thus  affirm,  and  says  of  the 
bread,  '  This  is  my  body ;'  who,  from  hence- 
forward, dare  be  so  bold  as  to  doubt  of  it  1 
And  since  the  same  (Christ)  does  assure  us,  and 
say  :  '  This  is  my  blood  ;'  who,  I  say,  can  doubt 
of  it,  and  say,  it  is  not  his  blood  ?  In  Cana  of 
Galilee  he  once,  with  his  sole  will,  turned  water 
into  wine,  which  much  resembles  blood  ;  and 
does  not  he  deserve  to  be  credited,  that  he 
changed  wine  into  his  blood  ;  for  if,  when  in- 
vited to  a  corporal  marriage,  he  wrought,  so  stu- 
pendous a  miracle,  have  we  not  much  more 
reason  to  confess,  that  he  gave  his  body  and 
blood  to  the  children  of  the  bridegroom  ? 
Wherefore,  full  of  certainty,  let  us  receive  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ ;  for  under  the  form 
of  bread  is  given  to  thee  the  body,  and  the  blood 
under  the  form  of  wine ;  that  having  received 
the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  thou  mayest  be 
made  partaker  with  him  of  his  body  and  blood. 
Thus  we  shall  become  Christophers,  that  is, 
1  bearers  of  Christ,'  receiving  his  body  and 
blood  into  us.  Do  not,  therefore,  look  on  it  as 
mere  bread  only,  or  bare  wine  ;  for,  as  God 
himself  has  said,  it  is  the  body  and  blood  of 
Christ.  Notwithstanding  therefore,  the  infor- 
mation of  sense,  let  faith  confirm  thee  ;  and  do 
not  judge  of  the  thing  by  the  taste,  but  rather 
take  it  for  most  certain  by  faith,  without  the 
least  doubt  that  his  body  and  blood  are  given 
thee.  When  you  come  to  communion,  do  not 
come  holding  both  the  palms  of  your  hands  open, 
nor  your  fingers  spread  ;  but  let  your  left  hand 
be  as  it  were  a  rest  under  the  right,  into  which 
you  are  to  receive  so  great  a  King ;  and  in  the 
hollow  of  your  hand  take  the  body  of  Christ, 
saying,  amen."(/) 

St.  Gregory  Nyssen  :(g)  "When  we  have 
eaten  any  thing  that  is  prejudicial  to  our  consti- 
tution, it  is  necessary  that  we  take  something 
that  is  capable  of  repairing  what  was  impaired  ; 
that  so,  when  this  healing  antidote  is  within  us, 
it  may  work  out  of  the  body,  by  a  contrary 
affection,  all  the  force  of  the  poison.  And 
what  is  this  antidote  1  It  is  nothing  but  that 
body  which  overcame  death,  and  was  the  origin 
of  our  life.  For,  as  the  apostle  tells  us,  as  a 
little  leaven  makes  the  whole  lump  like  itself,  so 
that  body  which,  by  God's  appointment,  suffered 
death,  being  received  within  our  body,  changes 
and  reduces  the  whole  to  its  own  likeness.  And 
as  when  poison  is  mixed  up  with  any  thing  that 
is  medicinal,  the  whole  compound  is  rendered 
useless  ;  so  likewise  that  immortal  body  being 
within  him  that  receives  it,  converts  the  whole 
into  its  own  nature.  But  there  being  no  other 
way  of  receiving  any  thing  within  our  body 
unless  it  be  first  conveyed  into  our  stomach  by 
eating  or  drinking,  it  is  necessary  that  by  this 
ordinary  way  of  nature,  the  life-giving  virtue  of 
the  Spirit  be  communicated  to  us.  But  now, 
since  that  body  alone,  which  was  united  to  the 

(e)  In  Catechis. 

(/)  It  was  the  custom  in  those  days  for  the  priest  to  de- 
liver the  holy  sacrament  into  the  hands  of  the  communicant. 
(g)  In  Orat.  Cat.,  c.  37. 


102 


PROTESTANT  CORRUPTIONS 


Divinity,  has  received  this  grace,  and  it  is  mani- 
fest that  our  body  can  no  otherwise  become  im 
mortal,  we  are  to  consider  how  it  is  impossible, 
that  one  body,  which  is  always  distributed  to  so 
many  thousand  Christians  over  the  whole  world, 
should  be  the  whole,  by  a  part  in  every  one,  and 
still  remain  whole  in  itself." 

And  a  little  after  :  "  I  do,  therefore,  now 
rightly  believe,  that  the  bread  sanctified  by  the 
word  of  God  is  changed  into  the  body  of  God 
the  Word.  And  here  likewise  the  bread,  as 
the  apostle  says,  is  sanctified  by  the  word  of 
God  and  prayer  :  not  so,  that  by  being  eaten  it 
becomes  the  body  of  the  Word,  but  because  it  is 
suddenly  changed  by  the  word  into  his  body, 
by  these  words  :  '  This  is  my  body.'  And  this 
is  effected  by  virtue  of  the  benediction,  by  which 
the  nature  of  those  things  which  appear  is 
transelemented  into  it." 

Again,  in  another  place  :(a)  "  And  the  bread 
in  the  beginning  is  only  common  bread  ;  but 
■when  it  is  sanctified  by  the  mystery,  it  is  made 
and  called  the  body  of  Christ." 

St.  Hierom  :  "  God  forbid,"  says  he,  "  that 
I  should  speak  detractingly  of  these  men, 
(priests,)  who,  by  succeeding  the  apostles  in 
their  function,  do  make  the  body  of  Christ 
with  their  sacred  mouth. "(b) 

St.  Augustine  :  "  We  have  heard,"  says  he, 
"  our  Master,  who  always  speaks  truth,  our  di- 
vine Redeemer,  the  Saviour  of  men,  recom- 
mending to  us  our  ransom,  his  blood  ;  for  he 
spake  of  his  body  and  blood ;  which  body  he 
called  meat  and  which  blood  he  called  drink. 
The  faithful  understand  the  sacrament  of  the 
faithful."  "  But  there  are  some,"  says  he, 
"  who  do  not  believe  ;  they  said  :  '  This  is  an 
hard  saying,  who  can  hear  him  ?"  It  is  an  hard 
saying  but  to  those  who  are  obstinate ;  that  is, 
it  is  incredible  but  to  the  incredulous. "(c) 


The  same  holy  father  and  great  doctor,  in  his 
commentary  upon  the  Thirty-third  Psalm, 
speaks  thus  of  Christ :  "  And  he  was  carried  in 
his  own  hands  ?  And  can  this,  brethren,  be 
possible  in  man  ?  Was  ever  any  man  carried 
in  his  own  hands  ?  He  may  be  carried  by  the 
hands  of  others,  but  in  his  own  no  man  was 
ever  yet  carried.  How  this  can  be  literally  un- 
derstood of  David,  we  cannot  discover  ;  but  in 
Christ  we  find  it  verified  ;  for  Christ  was  car- 
ried in  his  own  hands,  when  giving  his  own  very 
body,  he  said  :  '  This  is  my  body  ;'  for  that  body 
he  carried  in  his  own  hands."  Such  is  the 
humility  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  which  is 
much  recommended  to  men.  How  plain  and 
positive  are  the  words  of  these  ancient  and  holy 
fathers,  for  the  real  presence  of  Christ's  body 
and  blood  in  the  blessed  sacrament  of  the 
eucharist,  which  Protestants  so  flatly  deny  ?  1 
would  ask  our  Church  of  England  divines, 
whether,  if  they  had  been  present  among  the 
apostles  when  Christ  said  :  "  Take  and  eat,  this 
is  my  body,"  they  durst  have  assumed  the  bold- 
ness to  have  contradicted  the  omnipotent  Word, 
and  have  replied :  "  It  is  not  thy  body,  Lord,  it 
is  only  bread  ?"  I  believe  the  most  stiff  sacra- 
mentarian  in  England  would  have  trembled  to 
have  made  such  a  reply  ;  though  now  they  dare, 
with  blasphemous  mouth,  call  the  doctrine  of 
transubstantiation,  the  "  mystery  of  iniquity." 

I  have  insisted  somewhat  longer  upon  these 
two  points  than,  perhaps,  the  reader  may  think 
proper  for  this  treatise  ;  but  when  he  considers 
that  the  priesthood  and  sacrifice,  against  which 
Protestants  have  corrupted  the  scripture,  and 
framed  their  new  articles  of  faith,  are  two  such 
essential  parts  of  Christian  religion,  that  if  either 
of  them  be  taken  away,  the  whole  fabric  of 
God's  church  falls  to  the  ground,  he  will  not 
look  upon  it  as  an  unnecesary  digression. 


SEVERAL  OTHER  CORRUPTIONS  AND  FALSIFICATIONS 


NOT  MENTIONED  UNDER  THE  FOREGOING  HEADS. 


This  Treatise  increasing  beyond  what  indeed 
I  designed  it  at  first,  will  oblige  me  to  as  much 
brevity  as  possible,  in  these  following  corrup- 
tions : 

In  Romans  viii.  39,  instead  of  the  word  "  cha- 
rity," they,  contrary  to  the  Greek,  translate 
"  love  ;"  and  so  generally  in  all  places,  where 
much  is  spoken  in  commendation  of  charity. 
The  reason  is,  because  they  attribute  salvation 
to  faith  alone,  they  care  not  how  little  charity 
may  sound  in  the  ears  of  the  people.  So  like- 
wise in  1  Cor.  xiii.  for  "  charity,"  they  eight 
times  say  "love."  In  Rom.  ix.  16,  for  this 
text :  "  Therefore  it  is  not  of  the  wilier,  nor 
the  runner,  but  of  God  that  showeth  mercy," 


(a)  In  Orat.  in  diem  Luminum. 
(ft)  In  Rpist.  ad  Helibdorum. 
(c)  Lib.  de  Verb.  Apost.  Serm. 


they  translate  in  their  old  Bibles  :  "  So  lieth  it 
not  then  in  a  man's  will  or  running,  but  in  the 
mercy  of  God ;"  changing  of,  into  in,  and 
wilier  and  runner,  into  will  and  running ;  and 
so  make  the  apostle  say,  that  it  is  not  at  all  in 
man's  will  to  consent  or  co-operate  with  God's 
grace  and  mercy. 

In  1  Corinthians  i.  J  0,  for  "  schisms,"  which 
are  spiritual  divisions  from  the  unity  of  the 
church,  they  translate  "  dissensions,"  which  may 
be  in  worldly  things,  as  well  as  religion  ;  this 
is  done  because  themselves  were  afraid  to  be 
accounted  schismatics.     So  likewise 

In  Galatians  v.  20,  for  "  heresy,"  as  it  is  in 
the  Greek,  they  translate  "  sects,"  in  favour  of 
themselves,  being  charged  with  heresy  ;  also 

In  Titus  iii.  10,  instead  of  saying,  according 
to  the  Greek,  "  A  man  that  is  an  heretic, 
<fec,  their  Bible  of  1662  translates,  "A  man 


OF    THE    SCRIPTURE. 


103 


that  is  author  of  sects  ;"  favouring  that  name  for 
their  own  sakes,  and  dissembling  it  as  though 
the  holy  scripture  spake  not  against  heresy  or 
heretics,  schism  or  schismatics. 

In  1  Tim.  iii.  6,  for  a  "  neophyte,"  (one  lately 
baptized  or  planted  in  Christ's  mystical  body,) 
they  translate  in  their  first  Bibles,  "  a  young 
scholar  ;"  as  though  an  old  scholar  could  not  be 
a  neophyte,  by  deferring  his  baptism,  or  by  long 
delaying  his  conversion  to  God,  which  he  learn- 
ed to  be  necessary  long  before. 

In  Titus  iii.  8,  instead  of  these  words,  "  to 
excel  in  good  works,"  they  translate,  "  to  show 
forth  good  works  ;"  and,  as  their  last  edition  has 
it,  "  to  maintain  good  works  ;"  against  the  dif- 
ferent degrees  of  good  works. 

In  Hebrews  x-  20,  for  "  dedicated,"  they 
translate,  in  their  first  Bibles,  "  prepared,"  in 
favour  of  their  heresy,  that  Christ  was  not  the 
first  who  went  into  heaven,  which  the  word  dedi- 
cated signifies. 

In  the  two  Epistles  of  Peter,  iii.  16,  they 
force  the  text  to  maintain  a  frivolous  evasion, 
that  "  St.  Paul's  Epistles  are  not  hard,"  but  the 
"  things  in  the  epistles  ;"  whereas  both  the 
Greek  and  Latin  texts  are  indifferent  with  regard 
to  both  constructions.  It  is  a  general  custom 
of  theirs,  and  where  they  find  the  Greek  text 
indifferent  to  two  senses,  there  they  restrain 
it  only  to  that  which  may  be  most  advantage- 
ous to  their  own  error,  thereby  excluding  its 
reference  to  the  other  sense.  And  often- 
times, where  one  sense  is  received,  read,  and 
expounded  by  the  greater  part  of  the  ancient 
fathers,  and  by  all  the  Latin  church,  there  they 
very  partially  follow  the  other  sense,  not  so 
generally  received. 

In  St.  James  i.  13,  for  "  God  is  not  a  tempter 
of  evils,"  they  translate,  "  God  is  not  tempted 
with  evils,"  and  "  God  cannot  be  tempted  with 
evils,"  (a)  than  which  nothing  is  more  imper- 
tinent to  the  apostle's  speech  in  that  place.  Win- 
is  it  that  they  refuse  to  say,  "  God  is  not  tempted 
to  evil,"  as  well  as  the  other  1  is  it  on  account 
of  the  Greek  word,  which  is  passive  ?  They 
may  find  in  their  lexicon,  that  it  is  both  an  active 
and  passive  ;  as  also  appears  by  the  very  cir- 
cumstance of  the  foregoing  words,  "  Let  no  man 
say,  that  he  is  tempted  by  God."  Why  so  1 
"  Because,"  says  the  Protestant  translators, 
"  God  is  not  tempted  with  evil."  Is  this  a  good 
reason  1  nothing  less.  How  then  ?  "  Because, 
God  is  not  tempted  to  evil ;"  therefore  let  no 
man  say,  that  "  he  is  tempted  by  God." 

This  reason  is  so  coherent,  and  so  necessary 
in  this  place,  that  if  the  Greek  word  were  only 
a  passive,  as  it  is  not,  yet  it  might  have  better 
beseemed  Beza  to  translate  it  actively,  than  it 
did  to  turn  an  active  into  a  passive,  against  the 
real  presence,  as  himself  confesses  he  did  with- 
out scruple.  But  though  he  might  and  ought  to 
have  translated  this  word  actively,  yet  he  would 
not,  because  he  would  favour  his  own  heresy  ; 
which,  quite  contrary  to  these  words  of  the 
apostle,  says,  that  "  God  is  a  tempter  to  evil ;"  his 

(a)  A.xetoaao{  kqk&v. 


words  are,  Inducit  Dominus  in  tentationem  eos 
quos  satance  arhitrio  permiltet,  &c.  (b)  "  The 
Lord  leads  into  temptation  those  whom  he  per- 
mits to  be  at  satan's  disposal ;  or,  into  whom 
rather  he  leads  or  brings  in  satan  himself,  to  fill 
their  hearts,  as  Peter  speaketh."  Note,  that  he 
says,  God  brings  satan  into  a  man  to  fill  his 
heart,  as  Peter  said  to  Ananias  :  "  Wrhy  has 
satan  filled  thy  heart,  to  lie  unto  the  Holy- 
Ghost  ?"  So  that  by  this  doctrine  of  Beza,  God 
brought  satan  into  Anania's  heart  to  make  him 
lie  unto  the  Holy  Ghost ;  and  so  leading  him 
into  temptation,  was  author  and  cause  of  that 
henious  sin. 

Is  not  this  to  say, "  God  is  a  tempter  to  evil," 
quite  contrary  to  St.  James's  words  ?  Or  could 
he  that  is  of  this  opinion,  translate  the  contrary  ; 
to  wit,  that  "  God  is  no  tempter  to  evil  ?"  Is  not 
this  as  much  as  to  say,  that  God  also  brought 
satan  into  Judas  to  fill  his  heart,  and  so  was 
author  of  Judas's  treason,  even  as  he  was  of 
Paul's  conversion  ?  Is  not  this  a  most  absurd 
and  blasphemous  opinion  ?  Yet  how  can  they 
free  themselves  from  it,  who  allow  and  maintain 
the  aforesaid  exposition  of  "  God's  leading  into 
temptation  ?"  Nay,  Beza,  for  maintaining  the 
same,  translates,  "  God's  providence,"  instead 
of  "  God's  prescience,"  Acts  ii.  23,  a  version  so 
false,  that  the  English  Bezaites,  in  their  transla- 
tion, are  ashamed  to  follow  him. 

And  which  is  worse  than  all  this,  if  worse  can 
be,  they  make  God  not  only  a  leader  of  men  into 
temptation,  but  even  the  author  and  worker  of 
sin :  yea,  that  God  created  or  appointed  men  to 
sin  ;  as  appears  too  plainly,  not  only  in  their 
translation  of  this  following  text  of  St.  Peter's, 
but  also  from  Beza's  commentary  on  the  same. 
Also  Bucer,  one  of  king  Edward  the  Vlth's 
apostles,  held  directly,  that  "  God  is  the  author 
of  sin."  (c) 

St.  Peter  says  of  the  Jews,  that  Christ  is  to 
them,  Petra  scandali  qui  offendunt  verbo  nee 
credunt  in  quo  et  positi  sunt,  fls  o  xal  iii&eoar  ; 
that  is,  "  A  rock  of  scandal  to  them  (the  Jews) 
that  stumble  at  the  word,  neither  do  believe 
wherein  also  they  are  put,"  as  the  Rhemish 
Testament  translates  it :  or  as  it  is  rendered  in 
king  Edward  the  Vlth's  English  translation,  and 
in  the  first  of  queen  Elizabeth's,  "  they  believe 
not  that  whereon  they  were  set ;"  which  transla- 
tion Illyricus  approves,  (d)  "  This  is  well  to  be 
marked,  lest  a  man  imagine  that  God  himself  did 
put  them,  and  (as  one,  meaning  Beza,  against 
the  nature  of  the  Greek  word,  translates  and  in- 
terprets it)  that  God  created  them  for  this  pur- 
pose, that  they  should  withstand  him.  Erasmus 
and  Calvin,  referring  this  word  to  that  which  goes 
before,  interpret  it  not  amiss,  that  the  Jews  were 
made  or  ordained  to  believe  the  word  of  God, 
and  their  Messias  ;  but  yet  that  they  would  not 
believe  him  ;  for  to  them  belonged  the  promises, 
the  testaments,  and  the  Messias  himself;  as  St. 


(b)  Annot.  Nov.  Test.,  anno  155G,  Matt.  vi.  13. 

(c)  See  Bucer's  Scripta  Anglicana,  p.  931 ;  et  in  Epist. 
ad  Rom.  in  p.  I,  c.  94. 

(d)  Illyricus's  Gloss,  in  1  Pet.  ii.  8. 


104 


PROTESTANT    CORRUPTIONS 


Peter  says,  Acts,  ii.  3,  and  St.  Paul,  Rom.  ix. 
And  to  them  were  committed  the  oracles  of 
God,  by  witness  of  the  same  Paul,  Rom.  iii." 
Thus  Illyricus  ;  who  has  here  given  the  true 
sense  of  this  text,  according  to  the  signification 
of  the  Greek  word ;  and  has  proved  the  same 
by  scripture,  by  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul,  and  has 
confirmed  it  by  Erasmus  and  Calvin.  Yea, 
Luther  follows  the  same  sense  in  this  place :  so 
does  Castalio  in  his  annotations  to  the  New 
Testament, 

Yet  Beza,  against  all  these,  to  defend  his 
blasphemous  doctrine,  that  "  God  leads  men  into 
temptation,  and  brings  in  satan  to  fill  their  hearts," 
translates  it  thus  :  Sunt  immorigeri  ad  quod  etiatn 
conditi  feurunt,  (a)  "  They  are  rebellious, 
whereunto  also  they  were  created  ;"  With  whom 
his  scholars,  our  English  translators,  are  resolv- 
ed to  agree ;  therefore,  in  their  Bible  of  the 
year  1577,  they  read,  "  Being  disobedient  unto 
the  which  thing  they  were  ordained."  And  in 
that  of  1572  :  "  Being  disobedient  unto  the  which 
thing  they  were  even  ordained."  This  is  yet 
worse,  and  with  this,  word  for  word,  agrees  the 
Testament  of  1580,  and  the  Scottish  Bible  of 
1579.  This  is  also  the  Geneva  translation  in 
the  Bible  of  1561,  which  the  French  Geneva 
Bible  follows.  And  how  much  our  Protestant 
last  translation  differs  from  these,  may  be  seen 
in  the  Bible  printed  at  London,  anno  1683, 
where  it  is  read  thus  :  "  And  a  rock  of  offence, 
even  to  them  which  stumble  at  the  word,  being 
disobedient  whereunto  also  they  are  appointed." 

Is  not  this  to  say  positively,  that  God  is  au- 
thor of  men's  disobedience  or  rebellion  against 
Christ  ?  "  But,  if  God,"  says  Castalio  against 
Beza,  "  hath  created  some  men  to  rebellion  or 
disobedience,  he  is  author  of  their  disobedience  ; 
as  if  he  has  created  some  to  obedience,  he  is 
truly  author  of  their  obedience."  Yes,  this  is  to 
make  God  the  author  of  men's  sin,  for  which 
purpose  it  was  so  translated  :  and  thus  Beza  in 
his  notes  upon  the  text  explains  it ;  that  "  men 
are  made  or  fashioned,  framed,  stirred  up,  crea- 
ted or  ordained,  not  by  themselves,  for  that  were 
absurd,  but  by  God,  to  be  scandalized  at  him, 
and  his  Son  our  Saviour ;  Christus  est  eis  offen- 
diculo,  prout  etiam  ad  hoc  ipsum  a  Deo  sunt  con- 
diti .-"  and  further  discourses  at  large,  and  brings 
other  texts  to  prove  this  sense,  and  this  translation. 

And  though  Luther  and  Calvin,  as  is  said,  dis- 
sented not  from  the  true  sense  of  this  text,  yet 
touching  the  blasphemous  doctrine,  (b)  that 
"  God  is  the  author  of  sin,"  they,  with  Zuinglius, 
must,  for  all  this,  have  the  right  hand  of  Beza. 
"  How  can  man  prepare  himself  to  good,"  says 
Luther,  "  seeing  it  is  not  in  his  power  to  make 
his  ways  evil  1  For  God  works  the  wicked 
work  in  the  wicked." 

"  When  we  commit  adultery  or  murder,"  says 
Zuinglius,  "  it  is  the  Avork  of  God,  being  the 
mover,  the  author,  and  inciter,  &c.     God  moves 

{a)  Vide  Castalio  in  Defensione  qua  Translat.,  pp.  153, 
154  155. 

(b)  Lut.  To.  2,  Wittem.  an.  1551,  Assert.  Art.  36,  Vid. 
de  Servo.  Arbit.  fol.  195,  Edit.  1603.  Zuing.  To.  10,  de 
providentia  Dei,  fol.  365,  366,  367. 


the  thief  to  kill,  &c.  He  is  forced  to  sin,  &c 
God  hardened  Pharaoh,  not  speaking  hyperbo- 
lically,  but  he  truly  hardens  him,  yea,  although 
he  resist."  By  which,  and  other  of  his  writings, 
he  so  plainly  teaches  God  to  be  the  author  of 
sin,  that  he  is  therefore  particularly  reprehended 
by  the  learned  Protestant,  Grawerus,  in  Absur- 
da  Absurdorum,  c.  5,  de  Prcedest.,  fol.  3,  4. 

"  God  is  author,"  says  Calvin,  "  of  all  those 
things,  which  these  Popish  judges  would  have  to 
happen  only  by  his  idle  sufferance."  (c)  He 
also  affirms  our  sins  to  be  not  only  by  God's 
permission,  but  by  "  his  decree  and  will."  Which 
blasphemy  is  so  evidently  taught  by  him  and 
his  followers,  that  they  are  expressly  condemn- 
ed for  it  by  their  famous  brethren  :  Feming,  lib. 
de  Unioers.  Grat.,p.  109.;  Osiander,  Enchirid. 
Controv.,  p.  104;  Scaffman,  de  Peccat.,  Causis, 
pp.  155,  27;  Stizlinus,  Desput.  Theol.  de  Pro- 
vid.  Dei.  sect.  141  ;  Graver,  in  Absurda  Absurd., 
in  Frontisp.  Yea,  the  Protestant  magistrates 
of  Berne  made  it  penal  by  the  laws,  for  any  in 
their  territories  to  preach  Calvin's  doctrine 
thereof,  or  for  the  people  to  read  any  of  his 
books  concerning  the  same,  (d)  Are  not  these 
blessed  reformers  1  "  O  excellent  instrument  of 
God  !"  as  Dr.  Tenison  styles  the  chief  of  them.(e) 

Protestants  denying  free  will  in  man,  not  only 
to  do  good,  but  even  to  resist  evil,  open  a  very 
wide  passage  into  this  impious  doctrine,  of 
making  God  the  author  of  sin. 

In  1  St.  Peter  i.  22,  the  apostle  exhorts 
Christains  to  live  as  becomes  men  of  so  excel- 
lent a  vocation :  "  Purifying,"  says  he,  "  your 
souls  by  obedience  of  charity,"  (/)  &c. ;  a  little 
before,  verse  17,  remembering  always,  that 
"  God,  without  exception  of  persons,  judges  every 
man  according  to  his  works."  From  which  place 
it  appears,  that  we  have  free  will  working  with 
the  grace  of  God  ;  that  we  purify  and  cleanse 
our  souls  from  sin  ;  that  good  works  are  neces 
sarily  required  of  Christians  :  for  by  many  di- 
vine arguments  St.  Peter  urges  this  conclusion  ; 
Ut  anirnas  nostras  castificemus,  "  That  we  purify 
our  own  souls."  So  the  Protestant  translation, 
made  in  Edward  the  Sixth's  time,  has  it,  "  For- 
asmuch as  you  have  purified  your  souls."  {g) 
So  likewise  one  of  queen  Elizabeth's  Bibles  : 
"  Even  ye  which  have  purified  your  souls  ;"  and 
so  it  is  in  the  Greek.  Notwithstanding  all 
which,  Beza,  in  his  Testaments  of  1556  and 
1565,  translates  it,  Animabus  vestris  purificatis 
obediendo  veritati  per  Spiritum  :  which  another 
of  queen  Elizabeth  s  Bibles  renders  thus  :  "  See- 
ing your  souls  are  purified  in  obeying  the  truth, 
through  the  Sprit."  So  translates  also  the  En- 
glish Bible,  printed  at  Geneva,  1561,  and  the 
Scotch,  printed  at  Edinburgh,  1579. 

So  that  these  words  make  nothing  at  all  either 
for  free  will,  or  co-operation  with  God's  grace, 
or  value  of  good   works,  but  rather   the   con- 

(c)  Calvin,  instit.  1. 1,  c.  18,  and  1.  2,  c.  4,  and  1 . 3,  c.  23. 

(d)  Vid.  Litteras  Senat.  Bern,  ad  Ministros,  &c.  an. 
1555. 

(c)  Dr.  Ten.  Conf.  with  M.  P. 

(/)  Castificantes  anhnas  vestras  in  obedientia  Charita.tis. 

(-)Bib.  1561,  1579. 


OF    THE    SCRIPTURE. 


105 


trary ;  proving  that  in  our  justification  we 
work  not,  but  are  wrought ;  we  purify  not  our- 
selves, but  are  purified ;  we  are  not  active  and 
doers  with  God's  grace,  but  passive  and  suffer- 
ers ;  which  opinion  the  Council  of  Trent  con- 
demns, (a)  The  Protestant  Bible  of  1683,  has 
again  corrected  this,  and  translates  :  "  Seeing  ye 
have  purified  your  souls,"  &c.  ;  but  whether  with 
any  good  and  sincere  intention,  appears  by  their 
having  left  uncorrected  another  fault  of  the  same 
stamp  in  Philippians  i.  28. 

Where  St.  Paul,  handling  the  same  argument, 
exhorts  the  Christians  not  to  fear  the  enemies 
of  Christ,  though  they  persecute  ever  so  ter- 
ribly, "  which  to  them,"  says  he,  "  is  cause  of 
perdition,  but  to  you  of  salvation  ;"  where  he 
makes  good  works  necessary,  and  so  the  causes 
of  salvation,  as  sins  are  of  damnation.  But 
Beza  will  have  the  old  interpreter  overseen  in 
so  translating  :  "  because,"  says  he,  "  the  afflic- 
tion of  the  faithful  is  never  called  the  cause  of 
their  salvation,  but  the  testimony."  (&)  And, 
therefore,  translates  the  Greek  word  tdeitii;, 
indicium.  And  his  scholars,  the  English  trans- 
lators, render  it  a  "  token  ;"  though,  indeed,  one 
of  their  Testaments  translates  it,  as  we  do, 
a  "  cause  ;"  so  do  also  Erasmus,  and  the  Ti- 
gurine  translators  ;  (c)  yea,  the  apostles  com- 
paring sins  with  good  works,  these  leading  to 
heaven,  as  those  to  hell,  convinces  its  sense  to 
be  so ;  as  Theodoret,  a  Greek  father,  also 
gathers  from  that  word,  saying :  "  That  pro- 
cures to  them  destruction,  but  to  you  salvation." 
(d)  So  St.  Augustine,  St.  Hierom,  and  other 
Latin  fathers. 

And  that  good  works  are  a  cause  of  salvation, 
our  Saviour  himself  clearly  shows,  when  he  thus 
speaks  of  Mary  Magdalen  :  Remittuntur  ei  pec- 
cata  rnulta,quoniam  dihxit  imdtum  :  "  Many  sins 
are  forgiven  her,  because  she  loveth  much." 
Against  which  no  man  living  can  cavil  from  the 
Greek,  Hebrew,  or  Latin,  but  that  works  of 
charity  are  a  cause  why  sins  are  forgiven  ;  and 
so  a  cause  of  our  justification  and  salvation, 
which  are  evidently  the  words  and  meaning  of 
our  blessed  Saviour.  Notwithstanding,  Beza 
and  our  English  translators  have  a  shift  for  this 
also  ;  he  translates,  Remissa  sunt  peccata  ejus 
multa  ;  nam  dilexit  multum  :  which  in  our  Eng- 
lish Bible  is  rendered,  "  Her  sins  which  are 
many,  are  forgiven ;  for  she  loved  much  ;"  (e) 
which  the  reader,  perhaps,  may  think  to  be  a 
difference  so  small  as  is  not  worth  taking  notice 
of;  but,  if  well  considered,  will  be  found  as  great 
as  is  between  our  doctrine  and  Protestants. 
And  first,  the  text  is  corrupted,  by  making  a 
fuller  point  than  either  the  Greek  or  Latin 
bears,  the  English  making  some  a  colon,  (:)  and 
some  a  semicolon,  (;)  where  in  the  Greek  there 
is  only  a  comma  (,) ;  and  Beza  in  his  Latin,  yet 
more  desperately  makes  a  down  and  full  period, (.) 


/a)  Sess.  6,  cap.  4. 

(6)  Beza  Annot.  in  ilium  locum 

(c)  Bib.  1561. 

(d)  Theod.  in  Phil.,  cap. 

ie)  Beza  Test-,  anno  1565.   Bib   168S. 


thereby  dividing  and  distracting  the  latter  part 
from  the  former,  as  though  it  contained  not  a 
reason  of  that  which  went  before,  as  it  does,  but 
were  some  new  matter  ;  wherein  he  is  controlled 
by  another  of  his  own  translators,  and  by  the 
Greek  prints  of  Geneva,  Zurich,  Basil,  and  other 
German  cities,  who  point  it  as  it  is  in  our  Latin 
and  English.  But  their  falsehood  appear^  much 
more  in  turning  quoniam  into  nam,  "  because" 
into  "  for."  (/) 

Seeing  our  Saviour's  words  are  in  effect  thus  : 
"  Because  she  loved  much,  therefore,  many  sins 
are  forgiven  her  ;"  which  they,  by  this  perver- 
sion and  mispointing  it,  make  a  quite  different, 
and  almost  contrary  sense  ;  thus  :  "  Because  she 
had  many  sins  forgiven  her,  therefore,  she  loved 
much  ;"  and  this  love  following  was  a  token  of 
the  remission  which  she,  by  only  faith,  had  ob- 
tained before  ;  so  turning  the  cause  into  the 
effect,  and  the  antecedent  into  the  consequent, 
hereby  utterly  overthrowing  the  doctrine  which 
Christ  by  his  words  and  reason  gives,  and  the 
church  by  his  words  and  reason  gathers.  Beza 
blushes  not  to  confess  why  he  thus  altered 
Christ's  words,  saying :  Nam  dilexit,  ifi&niioB, 
"  For  she  loved  :"  the  Vulgate  translation  and 
Erasmus  render  it,  "  Because  she  loved."  "  But 
I  (says  he)  had  rather  interpret  it  as  I  do,  that 
men  may  understand  in  these  words  to  be  shown, 
not  the  cause  of  remission  of  sins,  but  rather 
that  which  ensued  after  such  remission,  and  that 
by  the  consequent  is  gathered  the  antecedent. 
And  therefore,  they  who  abuse  this  place,  to 
overthrow  free  justification  by  faith  alone,  are 
very  impudent  and  childish."  (g)  Thus  Beza. 
But  the  ancient  fathers,  who  were  neither  impu- 
dent nor  childish,  gathered  from  this  text,  that 
charity,  as  well  as  faith,  is  requisite  for  obtaining 
|  remission  of  sins.  St.  Chrysostom,  Horn.  6,  in 
I  Mat.  says,  (A)  "  As  first  by  water  and  the 
i  Spirit,  so  afterwards  by  tears  and  confession,  we 
B  are  made  clean  ;"  which  he  proves  by  this  place. 
|j  So  St.  Gregory,  expounding  this  same  place, 
lj  says,  "  Many  sins  are  forgiven  her,  because  she 
||  loved  much  ;  as  if  it  had  been  said  expressly, 
he  burns  out  perfectly  the  rust  of  sin,  whosoever 
burns  vehemently  with  the  fire  of  love.  For  so 
much  more  is  the  rust  of  sin  scoured  away,  by 
how  much  more  the  heart  of  a  sinner  is  inflamed 
with  the  great  fire  of  charity." 

And  St.  Ambrose  upon  the  same  words — 
"  Good  are  the  tears  which  are  able  to  wash 
away  our  sins.  Good  are  the  tears,  wherein  is 
not  only  the  redemption  of  sinners,  but  also  the 
refreshing  of  the  just." 

And  the  great  St.  Augustine,  debating  this 
story  in  a  long  homily,  says,  (i)  "  This  sinful 
woman,  the  more  she  owed,  the  more  she  loved  ; 
the  forgiver  of  her  debts,  our  Lord  himself,  af- 
firming so  :  Many  sins  are  forgiven  her,  because 
she  loved  much.     And  why  loved  she   much, 


(/)  1556. 

(g)  Beza  in  Luc.  vii.  47. 
(A)  Horn.  33,  in  Evang. 
(i)  Horn.  23,  inter.  50. 


10G 


PROTESTANT    CORRUPTION'S. 


but  because  she  owed  much  1  Why  did  she 
all  these  offices  of  weeping,  washing,  &c,  but 
to  obtain  remission  of  her  sins  ?"  Other  holy 
fathers  agree  in  the  self-same  verity,  all  making 
her  love  to  be  a  cause  going  before,  and  not  an 
effect  or  sequel  coming  after  the  remission  of  sins. 

I  have  only  taken  notice  here  how  Beza  and 
our  English  translators  have  corrupted  this 
text ;  but  he  who  pleases  to  read  Musculus, 
in  locis  Communibus,  c.  de  Justijicat.,  11,  5,  will 
find  him  perverting  it  after  another  strange 
manner,  by  boldly  asserting,  without  all  reason 
or  probable  conjecture,  that  our  blessed  Saviour 
spoke  in  Hebrew,  and  used  the  preterperfect  for 
the  present  tense  ;  and  that  St.  Luke  wrote  in 
the  Doric  dialect ;  so  that  Musculus  would  have 
it  said  :  "  She  loved  Christ  much,  and  no  won- 
der ;  she  had  good  cause  so  to  do,  because  many 
sins  were  forgiven  her." 

But  Zuingliiis  goes  yet  another  way  to  work 
with  this  text,  and  tells  us,  that  he  supposes  the 
word  "  love"  should  have  been  "  faith  :"  his 
words  are,  "  Because  she  loved  much.  I  sup- 
pose, that  love  is  here  put  for  faith  ;  because  she 
has  so  great  affiance  in  me,  so  many  sins  are 
forgiven  her.  For  he  says  afterwards,  Thy 
faith  hath  saved  thee  ;  that  is,  has  absolved  and 
delivered  thee  from  thy  sins."  (a)  Which  one 
distinction  of  his,  will  answer  all  the  places  that 
in  this  controversy  can  be  brought  out  of  scrip- 
ture to  refute  their  "  only  faith."  But,  to 
conclude,  what  can  be  more  impious  than  to 
affirm,  that  for  obtaining  of  sins,  charity  is  not 
required  as  well  as  faith,  seeing  our  blessed 
Saviour,  if  we  credit  his  evangelist,  St.  Luke, 
and  I  think  his  authority  ought  to  be  preferred 
before  that  of  Zuinglius,  Beza,  Musculus,  or 
our  English  sectaries,  most  divinely  conjoins 
charity  with  faith,  saying  of  charity,  "  Many  sins 
are  forgiven  her,  because  she  loved  much !" 
straightway  adding  of  faith,  "  Thy  faith  has  made 
thee  safe  ;  go  in  peace." 

As  you  see  here,  they  use  all  their  endeavours 
to  suppress  the  necessity  of  good  and  charitable 
works  ;  so,  on  the  other  side,  they  endeavoured 
to  make  their  first  Bibles  countenance  vice,  (b) 
so  far  as  to  seem  to  allow  of  the  detestable  sin 
of  usury,  provided  it  were  not  hurtful  to  the 
borrower.  In  Deuteronomy  xxiii.  19,  they 
translate  thus,  "  Thou  shalt  not  hurt  thy  brother 
by  usury  of  money,  nor  by  usury  of  corn,  nor  by 
usury  of  any  thing  that  he  may  be  hurt  withal ;" 
by  which  they  would  have  it  meant,  that  usury 
is  not  here  forbidden,  unless  it  hurts  the  party 
that  •borrows.  A  conceit  so  rooted  in  most 
men's  hearts,  that  they  think  such  usury  very 
lawful,  and  therefore  frequently  offend  therein. 
But  Almighty  God,  in  this  place  of  holy  scrip- 
ture, has  not  one  word  of  hurting,  or  not  hurting, 
as  may  be  seen  in  the  Hebrew  and  Greek ;  and 
as  also  appears  from  their  having  corrected  the 
same  in  their  Bible  of  1 683,  where  they  read,  as 
it  ought  to  be,  "  Thou  shalt  not  lend  upon  usury 
to  thy  brother,  usury  of  money,  usury  of  vic- 
tuals, usury  of  anything  that  is  lent  upon  usury." 

(a)  Zuin<r.  in  Luc.  vii.  To.  4. 
f,b)  Bib.  1562,  1577. 


If  the  Hebrew  word  signify  to  hurt  by  usury, 
why  did  not  they,  in  the  very  words  next  fol- 
lowing, in  the  self-same  Bibles,  translate  it  thus  : 
"  Unto  a  stranger  thou  mayest  lend  upon  usury, 
but  not  unto  thy  brother  V  why  said  they  not 
rather,  "  A  stranger  thou  mayest  hurt  by  usury, 
but  not  thy  brother  ?"  is  it  not  all  the  same  in 
word  and  phrase  here  as  before  ?  The  Jews 
would  have  given  them  thanks  for  so  translating 
it ;  who,  by  forcing  the  Hebrew  word  as  they 
do,  think  it  well  done,  to  hurt  any  stranger,  that 
is,  any  Christian   by   usury,  be  it  ever  so  great. 

Whether  the  first  Protestant  translators  of 
the  scriptures  were  guided  by  that  spirit  which 
should  be  in  Christian  Catholic  translators,  may 
be  easily  gathered  from  what  follows,  as  well  as 
from  what  you  have  already  seen. 

They  were  so  profane  and  dissolute,  that 
some  of  them  termed  that  divine  book', 
called,  Canticum,  Canticorum,  containing  the 
high  mystery  of  Christ  and  his  church,  "  The 
Ballad  of  Ballads  of  Solomon,"  as  if  it  were  a 
ballad  of  love,  between  Solomon  and  his  concu- 
bine, as  Castalio  wantonly  translated  it. 

And  yet  more  profanely,  in  another  place, 
which  even  their  last  translation  has  not  yet 
vouchsafed  to  correct,  "  We  have  conceived,  we 
have  born  in  pain,  as  though  we  should  have 
brought  forth  wind."  (c)  I  am  ashamed  to  set 
down  the  literal  commentary  of  this  their  trans- 
lation. Was  there  any  thing  in  the  Hebrew  to 
hinder  them  from  translating  it  in  this  manner : 
"  We  have  conceived,  and  as  it  were  travailed  to 
bring  forth,  and  have  brought  forth  the  Spirit  ?" 
Why  should  they  say  wind  rather  than  spirit  ? 
They  are  not  ignorant,  that  the  Septuagint  in 
Greek,  and  the  ancient  fathers,  do  all  expound 
it,  (d,  e,f,)  according  to  both  the  Hebrew  and 
Greek,  of  the  "  Spirit  of  God,"  which  is  first 
conceived  in  us,  and  begins  by  fear,  Avhich  the 
scripture  calls  :  "  The  beginning  of  wisdom  :" 
insomuch,  that  in  the  Greek  there  are  these 
godly  words,  famous  in  all  antiquity,  "  Through 
the  fear  of  thee,  O  Lord,  we  conceived,  and 
have  travailed  with  pain,  and  have  brought  forth 
the  Spirit  of  thy  salvation,  which  thou  hast  made 
upon  the  earth :"  which  excellently  sets  before 
our  eyes  the  degrees  of  a  faithful  man's  increase, 
and  proceeding  in  the  Spirit  of  God.  But.  to 
say,  "  We  have  been  with  child,"  as  their  last 
translation  has  it,  (g)  "  and  have  brought  forth 
wind,"  can  admit  no  spiritual  interpretation  ;  but 
even  as  a  mere  Jew  should  translate,  or  under- 
stand it,  who  has  no  sense  of  the  Spirit  of  God. 
It  is  the  custom  of  Protestants,  in  all  such  cases 
as  this,  where  the  more  appropriate  sense  is  of 
God's  holy  Spirit,  there  to  translate  wind,  as  in 
Psalm  cxlvii.  18. 

Another  impropriety  similar  to  this  is,  that 
they  will  not  translate  for  the  angel's  honour 
that  carried  Habakuc,  "  He  sent  him  into 
Babylon,  over  the   lake,  by    the   force  of  hi 3 

(c)  Isaiah  xvi.  18. 

{d)  St.  Ambrose,  lib.  2,  de  Interpret.,  c.  4. 
te)  Ghrysostom,  in  Psal.  vii.  prop.  fin. 
<  f)  See  S.  Hierom  upon  this  place. 
(g)  Bible  1683. 


OF  THE  SCRIPTURE. 


107 


spirit ;"  but  thus  :  "  Through  a  mighty  wind." 
So  attributing  it  to  the  wind,  not  to  the  angel's 
power,  and  omitting  quite  the  Greek  word,  uvju, 
"  his,"  which  showeth  plainly,  that  it  was  the 
angel's  spirit,  force,  and  power. (a) 

Again,  where  the  prophet  Isaiah  speaks  most 
manifestly  of  Christ,  saying  :  "  And  (our  Lord) 
shall  not  cause  thy  doctor  to  fly  from  thee  any 
more,  and  thine  eyes  shall  see  thy  master  ;" 
which  is  all  the  same  in  effect  with  that  which 
Christ  says,  "  I  will  be  with  you  unto  the  end  of 
the  world ;"  there  one  of  their  Bibles  translates 
thus,  "  Thy  rain  shall  be  no  more  kept  back, 
but  thine  eyes  shall  see  thy  rain."  Their  last 
translation  has  corrected  this  mad  falsification,  (b) 

Again,  where  the  holy  church  reads  :  "  Re- 
joice, ye  children  of  Zion,  in  the  Lord  your  God, 
because  he  has  given  you  the  doctrine  of  jus- 
tice ;"(c)  there  one  of  their  translations  has  it, 
"  The  rain  of  righteousness  :"  and  their  last 
Bible,  instead  of  correcting  the  former,  makes 
it  yet  worse,  if  it  can  be  made  worse,  saying, 
"  Be  glad  then,  ye  children  of  Sion,  &c  ,  for  he 
hath  given  you  the  former  rain  moderately." 
Does  the  Hebrew  word  force  them  to  this  ? 
Doubtless  they  cannot  but  know,  that  it  signifies 
a  teacher  or  master :  and  therefore,  even  the 
Jews  themselves,  partly  understand  it  of  Esdras, 
partly  of  Christ's  divinity :  yet  these  new  and 
partial  translators  are  resolved  to  be  more  pro- 
fane than  the  very  Jews.  If  they  had,  as  I 
hinted  above,  been  guided  by  a  Catholic  and 
Christian  spirit,  they  might  have  been  satisfied 
with  the  sense  of  St.  Hierom,  a  Christian  doctor, 
upon  these  places,  who  makes  no  doubt  but  the 
Hebrew  is  doctor,  master,  teacher  ;  who  also  in 
the  psalm  translates  thus  :  "  With  blessings  shall 
the  doctor  be  arrayed, "(d)  meaning  Christ ; 
where  Protestants,  with  the  Jews  of  latter  days, 
the  enemies  of  Christ,  translate,  "  The  rain  covers 
the  pools."  What  cold  stuff  is  this  in  respect  of 
that  other  translation,  so  clearly  pointing  to 
Christ,  our  doctor,  master  and  lawgiver.(e) 

And  again,  where  St.  Jerom,  and  all  the 
fathers  translate  and  expound,  "  There  shall  be 
faith  in  thy  times,"  to  express  the  wonderful 
faith  that  shall  be  among  Christians  ;  there  they 
translate,  "  There  shall  be  stability  of  thy  times." 
And  their  last  Bible  has  it  thus,  "  And  wisdom 
and  knowledge  shall  be  the  stability  of  thy 
times."  Whereas  the  prophet  reckons  all  these 
virtues  singly,  viz.,  judgment,  justice,  which 
they  term  righteousness,  faith,  wisdom,  knowl- 
edge, and  the  fear  of  our  Lord  ;  but  they,  for  a 
little  ambiguity  of  the  Hebrew  word,  turn  faith 
into  stability. 

In  Isa.  xxxvii.  22,  all  their  first  Bibles  read, 
"  O  virgin  daughter  of  Sion,  he  hath  despised 
thee,  and  laughed  thee  to  scorn  :  O  daughter  of 
Jerusalem,  he  hath  shaken  his  head  at  thee."  In 
the  Hebrew,  Greek,  St.  Hierom's  translation 
and  commentary,  as  also  in  the  last  Protestant 
Bible,  printed    1683,  it  is   quite  contrary,  viz., 


(a)  Isa.  xxx.  20. 

(b)  Joel  ii.  23. 

(c)  Lyra  in  30. 

(d)  Psalm  lxxxiv.  7. 


(e)  Isaiah  xxxiii.  6. 


"  The  virgin  daughter  of  Sion  has  despised  thee, 
O  Assur  :  the  daughter  of  Jerusalem  has  shaken 
her  head  at  thee."  All  are  of  the  feminine 
gender,  and  spoken  of  Sion  literally  triumphing 
over  Assur ;  and  of  the  church  spiritually  tri- 
umphing over  heresies,  and  all  her  enemies.  In 
their  first  Bibles  they  translated  all  as  of  the 
masculine  gender,  thereby  applying  it  to  Assur  ; 
insulting  against  Sion  and  Jerusalem.  But  for 
what  cause  or  reason  they  thus  falsify  it,  will  be 
hard  to  determine,  unless  they  dreaded,  that  by 
translating  it  otherwise  it  might  be  applied 
spiritually  to  the  church's  triumphing  over 
themselves,  as  her  enemies.  We  cannot  judge 
it  an  oversight  in  them,  because  we  find  it  so 
translated  in  the  fourth  book  of  Kings,  xix.  21, 
yea,  and  in  all  their  first  translations. 

A  great  many  other  faults  are  found  in  their 
first  translations,  which  might  be  passed  by,  as 
not  done  upon  any  ill  design,  but  perhaps,  rather 
as  mistakes  or  over-sights,  (/)  yet  however, 
touching  some  few  of  them,  it  will  not  be  amiss 
to  demand  a  reason,  why  they  were  committed  : 
as  for  example,  why  they  translated,  "  Ye  abject 
of  the  Gentiles,"  Isa.  xlv.  20,  rather  than,  "  Ye, 
who  are  saved  of  the  Gentiles ;"  or,  as  their 
translation  has  it,  "  Ye  that  are  escaped  of  the 
nations  ?"  or, 

Why,  in  their  Bible  of  1 579,  did  they  write 
at  length  :  "  Two  thousand  to  them  that  keep  the 
fruit  thereof,"  rather  than  "  two  hundred  ;"  as 
it  is  in  the  Hebrew  and  Greek,  and  as  now  their 
last  Bible  has  it  1  or, 

Why  read  they  in  some  of  their  Bibles,  "  As 
the  fruits  of  cedar  ;"  and  not  rather  according  to 
the  Greek  and  Hebrew,  "  Tabernacles  of 
cedar  ;"  or  however,  as  their  last  translation  has 
it,  "  Tents  of  Kedar  ?"  or, 

Why  do  they  translate  :  "  Ask  a  sign,  either 
in  the  depth,  or  in  the  height  above,"  rather  than, 
%Ask  a  sign,  either  in  the  depth  of  hell,"  &c,  as 
the  Hebrew,  Greek,  and   Latin  has  it  1(g)     Or, 

Why  do  they  translate  :  "  To  make  ready  an 
horse,"  rather  than  "  beasts,"  as  the  Greek  has 
it ;  and  as  also  now  their  edition  of  1683  reads 
it  1(h)     Or, 

Why  translate  they  :  "  If  a  man  on  the  sab- 
bath-day receive  circumcision,  without  breaking 
the  law  of  Moses  ;"  rather  than,  according  to 
the  Greek,  which  their  last  translation  has  fol- 
lowed :  "  If  a  man  on  the  sabbath-day  receive 
circumcision,  to  the  end  the  law  of  Moses  should 
not  be  broken  ?"(i)     Or, 

Why  read  they  :  "  The  Son  of  man  must 
suffer  many  things,  and  be  reproved  of  the 
elders,"  for  "  be  rejected  of  the  elders,"  as 
the  Greek,  and  now  their  Bibles  of  1683  have 
it  ;  and  as  in  the  Psalm,  "  The  stone  which  the 
builders  rejected  ;"  we  say  not  reproving  of  the 
said  stone,  which  is  Christ  l(k) 

Again,  why  translate  they  thus  :  Many  which 

(/)  Cantica.  Canticor-,  viii.  12. ;  Cantica.  Canticor.,i. 
4  ;  Isa.  vii.  11. 
(g)  Isa.  vii.  11. 
(A)  Acts  xxiii.  24. 
(i)  Jo.  vii.  23. 
(at)  Mark  viii.  31. 


108 


PROTESTANT  ABSURDITIES 


had  seen  the  first  house,  when  the  foundation  of 
this  house  was  laid  before  their  eyes,  wept,"  &c, 
when  in  the  Hebrew,  Greek,  and  Latin,  it  is 
read  thus  :  "  Many  who  had  seen  the  first  house 
in  the  foundation  thereof,  (i.  e.,  yet  standing 
upon  the  foundation,  undestroyed,)  and  this 
temple  before  their  eyes,  wept  ?"  I  suppose 
they  imagined,  that  it  should  be  meant  they 
saw  Solomon's  temple  when  it  was  first  founded  ; 


which,  because  it  was  impossible,  they  trans- 
lated otherwise  than  it  is  in  the  Hebrew  and 
Greek  :  they  should  indeed  have  considered 
better  of  it. 

Though  we  do  not  look  upon  several  of  these 
as  done,  I  say,  with  any  ill  design,  yet  we  cannot 
excuse  them  for  being  done  with  much  more 
licentious  boldness  than  ought  to  appear  in  sin- 
cere and  honest  translators. 


ABSURDITIES  IN  TURNING  PSALMS  INTO  METRE. 


Their  unrestrained  licentiousness  is  yet  fur- 
ther manifest,  in  their  turning  of  David's  Psalms 
into  rhyme,  without  reason,  and  then  singing 
them  in  their  congregations  ;  telling  the  people, 
from  Saint  James,  v. :  "  If  any  be  merry,  let 
him  sing  psalms  ;"  being  resolved  to  do  nothing 
but  what  they  produce  a  text  of  scripture  for, 
though  of  their  own  making :  for,  though  the 
apostle  exhorts  "  such  as  are  heavy,  to  pray," 
and  "  such  as  are  merry,  to  sing  ;"  yet  he  does 
not  in^ particular  appoint  David's  Psalms  to  be 
sung  by  the  merry,  no  more  than  he  appoints  our 
Lord's  Prayer  to  be  said  by  such  as  he  exhorts 
to  pray,  though  perhaps,  he  meant  it  of  both  :  so 
that  from  any  thing  our  bold  interpreters  can 
gather  from  the  text,  &quo  animo  est  ?  Psallat. 
yxlXsTco,  St.  James  might  mean  other  spiritual 
songs  and  hymns,  as  well  as  David's  Psalms  : 
but  be  it  that  he  exhorted  them  to  sing  David's 
Psalms,  which  we  have  no  cause  to  deny, because 
the  church  of  Christ  has  ever  used  the  same  ;  yet 
that  he  meant  it  of  such  nonsensical  rhymes  as 
T.  Sternhold,  Joseph  Hopkins,  Robert  Wisdom, 
and  other  Protestant  poets  have  made  to  be  sung 
in  their  churches,  under  the  name  of  David's 


Psalms,  none  can  ever  grant,  who  has  read 
them.  It  has  hitherto  been  the  practice  of  God's 
church  to  sing  David's  Psalms,  as  truly  trans- 
lated from  the  Hebrew  into  Latin  ;  but  never 
to  sing  such  songs  as  Hopkins  and  Sternhold 
have  turned  from  the  English  prose  into  metre  : 
neither  do  I  think  that  sober  and  judicious 
Protestants  themselves  can  look  upon  them  as 
good  forms  of  praises  to  be  sung  in  their  churches 
to  the  glory,  honour,  and  service  of  so  great,  so 
good,  and  so  wise  a  God,  when  they  shall  con- 
sider how  fully  they  are  fraught  with  nonsense 
and  ridiculous  absurdities,  besides  many  gross 
corruptions,  viz.,  above  two  hundred  ;(a)  con- 
fessed by  Protestants  themselves  to  be  found  in 
the  Psalms  in  prose,  from  which  these  were 
turned  into  metre,  which  we  may  guess  are 
scarcely  corrected  by  the  rhyme.  To  collect  all 
the  faults  committed  by  the  said  blessed  poets 
in  their  psalm-metre,  would  be  a  task  too  tedious 
for  my  designed  brevity ;  I  will,  therefore, 
only  set  down  some  few  of  their  absurd  and 
ridiculous  expressions  ;  and  for  the  rest,leave  the 
reader  to  compare  these  psalms  in  metre  with  the 
others  in  prose,  even  as  by  themselves  translated. 


PSALMS  in  Prose,  Bible  1683. 

Psalm  ii.  verse  3. 
Let  us  break  their  bands  asunder,  and  cast 
away  their  cords  from  us. 


Psalm  xvi.  verses  9,  10. 
Theretore,  my  heart  is  glad,  and  my  glory  re- 
joiceth :  my  flesh  also  shall  rest  in  hope.     For 
thou  wilt  not  leave  my  soul  in  hell,  &c. 


Psalm  xviii.  verse  36. 
Thou  hast  enlarged  my  steps  under  me,  that 
my  feet  did  not  slip. 


(a)  See  the  Preface. 

(b)  The  reader  need  not  be  told  why  this  is  added,  be- 
sides its  making  up  the  rhyme. 

(c)  What  they  translate  "  glory  "  in  prose   they  call 


PSALMS  in  xMetre,  Bible  1683. 


Psalm  ii.  verse  3. 

Shall  we  be  bound  to  them  *?  say  they  ; 

Let  all  their  bonds  be  broke, 
"  And  of  their  doctrine  and  their  law, 

Let  us  reject  the  yoke."{b) 

Psalm  xvi.  verses  9,  10. 
Wherefore  my  heart  and  "  tongue"  also,  (c) 

Do  both  rejoice  together  ; 
My  "  flesh  and  body"  rest  in  hope, 

When  I  this  thing  consider  : 
Thou  wilt  not  leave  my  soul  in  "  grave," 

For,  Lord,  thou  lovest  me,  &c. 

Psalm  xviii.  verse  36. 

And  under  me  thou  makest  plain 

The  way  where  I  should  walk : 
So  that  my  feet  shall  never  slip, 

"  Nor  stumble  at  a  balk." 

"  tongue,"  in  rhyme.  And  for  want  of  one  foot  to  make 
up  another  verse,  they  thrust  in  a  whole  body,  "  flesh  and 
body."  Again, what  in  prose  is  called  hell,  in  rhyme  they 
term  grave;  as  if  souls  were  left  in  the  grave. 


IN    TURNING    PSALMS    INTO    METRE. 


109 


PSALMS  in  Prose,  Bible  1G83. 

Psalm  xviii.  verse  37. 
I  have  pursued  mine  enemies,  and  overtaken  i| 
them  :  neither  did  I  turn  again   till  they    were  jj 
consumed. 

Psalm  xxii.  verse  7. 
All    they  that  see   me,  laugh  me   to    scorn. 
They  shoot  out  the  lip,  they  shake  the  head. 

Psalm  xxii,  verse  12. 
Many  bulls  have  compassed  me,  strong  bulls 
of  Basan  have  beset  me  round. 


Psalm  xxvi.  verse  10. 
In  whose  hand  is  mischief,  and  their  right 
hand  is  full  of  bribes. 


Psalm  xlix.  verse  20. 
Man  that  is  in  honour,  and  understandeth  not, 
is  like  the  beasts  that  perish. 

Psalm  lxxiv.  verses  11,  12. 
Why  withdraweth  thou  thy   hand,  even  thy 
right  hand  ?     Pluck  it  out  of  thy  bosom. 

i 
Psalm  lxxvii.  verse  16. 
— He  caused  waters  to  run  down  like  rivers. 

Psalm  lxxviii.  verse  57. 
— They  were  turned  aside  like  a  deceitful  bow. 

Psalm  Ixxxix.  verse  46. 
The  days  of  his  youth  hast  thou  shortened : 
thou  hast  covered  him  with  shame.     Selah. 


Psalm  xcvii.  verse  12. 
Light  is  sown  for  the  righteous,  and  gladness 
to  the  upright  in  heart. 

Psalm  xcix.  verse  1. 
The  Lord  reigneth,  let  the  people  tremble  ;  he 
sitteth  between  the  cherubims,  let  the  earth  be 
moved. 

Psalm  cxix.  verse  70. 
Their  heart  is  as  fat  as   grease :  (As  fat  as 
brawn,  in    another   Bible.     But   in   the    Latin 
Vulgate,  Coagulatum  est  sicut  lac  cor  eorum.) 

Psalm  cxix.  verse  83. 
Por  1  am  become  like  a  bottle  in  smoke. 


(a)  This  warrior  lays  about  him  in  a  different  manner 
from  David. 

(i^  We  have  heard  of  crafty  heads,  but  never  of  crafty 
hands. 

(c)  In  the  title  page  they  say  :  "  If  any  be  merry,  let  him 
sing  psalms."  But  considering  what  psalms  they  are.  they 
15 


PSALMS  ix  Metre,  Bible  1683. 

Psalm  xviii.  verse  37. 
So  I  suppress  and  wound  my  foes, 

That  they  can  rise  no  more : 
For  at  my  feet  they  fall  down  flat, 

I  strike  them  all  so  sore. (a) 

Psalm  xxii.  verse  7. 
All  men  despise,  as  they  behold 

Me  walking  on  the  way  : 
"  They  grin,  they  mow,  they  nod  their  heads,"  &c 

Psalm  xxii.  verse  12. 
So  many  bulls  do  compass  me, 

That  be  full  strong  of  head  : 
"  Yea,  bulls  so  fat,  as  though  they  had 

In  Basan-field  been  fed." 

Psalm  xxvi.  verse  10. 
Whose  hands  are  heap'd  with  "  craft  {b)  and  guile," 

Their  lives  thereof  are  full, 
And  their  ri<rht  hand  with  "  wrench  and  wile, 

For  bribes  doth  pluck  and  pull." 

Psalm  xlix.  verse  20. 
Thus  man  to  honour  God  hath  brought, 

Yet  doth  he  not  consider  ; 
But  like,  brute  beast,  so  doth  he  live, 

"  And  turn  to  dust  and  powder." 

Psalm  lxxiv.  verses  11,  12. 
Why  dost  thou  draw  thy  hand  "  a  back, 

And  hide  it  in  thy  lap  V 
O  pluck  it  out,  and  be  not  slack, 

"  To  give  thy  foes  a  rap."(e) 

Psalm  lxxvii.  verse  16. 
— Of  such  abundance  that  "  no  floods 
To  them  might  be  compared." 

Psalm  lxxviii.  verse  57. 
— They  went  astray, 
Much  like  a  bow  that  would  not  bend, 
But  slip  and  start  away. 

Psalm  Ixxxix.  verse  46. 
Thou  hast  cut  off,  and  made  full  short 

His  youth  and  lusty  days  ; 
"  And  rais'd  of  him  an  ill  report. 

With  shame  and  great  dispraise. "(d) 

Psalm  xcvii.  verse  12. 
And  light  doth  spring  up  to  the  just, 

With  pleasure  for  his  part, 
Great  joy  with  gladness,  mirth  and  lust,  &c.(e) 

Psalm  xcix.  verse  1. 
The  Lord  doth  reign,  •'  altho  at  it 

The  people  rage  full  sore  ;" 
Yea,  he  on  cherubims  doth  sit, 

"  Tho'  all  the  world  do  roar." 

Psalm  cxix.  verse  70. 
Their  hearts  are  swoln  with  worldly  wealth, 
As  "  grease  so  arc  they  fat." 


Psalm  cxix.  verse  83. 
As  a  "  skin-bottle"  in  the  smoke, 
So  am  I  parch'd  and  dried. 


advise  him  to  sing,  they  might  have  done  as  well  to  have 
said  rather,  "  If  any  would  be  merry,  let  him  sing  psalms." 

(i!)  To  say  that  God  raises  an  ill  report  of  men,  has  af- 
finity to  Beza's  doctrine,  which  makes  God  the  author  of 
sin.     Vid.  Supr. 

(e)  I  thought,  till  now,  that  lust  had  been  n  sin. 


110 


PROTESTANT    ABSURDITIES    IN    TURNING    PSALMS    INTO    METRE. 


PSALMS  in  Prose,  B^le  1683. 

Psalm  cxix.  verse  110. 
The  wicked  have  laid  a  snare  for  me. " 


Psalm  cxix.  verse  130. 
The  entrance  of   thy   word   giveth  light :  it 
giveth  understanding  unto  the  simple. 

Psalm  cxix.  verse  150. 
They  draw  nigh  that  follow  after  mischief: 
they  are  far  from  thy  law. 

Psalm  cxx.  verse  o. 
Woe  is  me,  that  I  sojourn  in  Mesech,  that  I 
dwell  in  the  tents  of  Kedar. 


Psalm  cxxvii.  verse  2. 
It  is  in  vain  for  you  to  rise  up  early,  to  sit  up 
late,  to  eat  the  bread  of  sorrow. 

Psalm  cxxix.  verse  6. 
Let  them  be   as   grass  upon   the  house-tops, 
which  withereth  before  it  groweth  up. 


PSALMS  in  Metre,  Bible  1683. 

Psalm  cxix.  verse  110. 
Altho'  the  wicked  laid  their  nets 
"  To  catch  me  at  a  bay." 

Psalm  cxix.  verse  130. 
When  men  first  "  enter  into"  thy  word, 

They  find  a  light  most  clear; 
And  very  idiots  understand, 

"  When  they  it  read  or  hear ."(6) 

Psalm  cxix.  verse  150. 
My  foes  draw  near,  "  and  do  procure 

My  death  maliciously :" 
Which  from  thy  law  are  far  gone  back, 

"  And  strayed  from  it  lewdly." 

Psalm  cxx.  verse  5. 
Alas!  too  long  I  slack, 
Within  these  tents  "so  black," 

Which  Kedars  are  by  ''  name  ;" 
"  By  whom  the  flock  elect, 
And  all  of  Isaac's  sect, 

Are  put  to  open  shame. "(c) 

Psalm  cxxvii.  verse  2. 

Though  ye  rise  early  in  the  morn, 
And  so  at  night  go  late  to  bed, 
"  Feeding  full  hardy  with  brown  bread," 

Yet  were  your  labour  "  lost  and  worn. "(d) 

Psalm  cxxix.  verse  6. 
And  made  as  grass  upon  the  house, 
Which  withereth  "  ere  it  grow. "(e) 


I  could  weary  the  reader  with  such  like  ex- 
amples ;  they  seldom  or  never  speak  of  God's 
covenant  with  Israel,  but  they  call  it  God's 
trade. (a)  As  in  Psalm  lxxviii.  10,  where  they  sing, 

For  why  1  they  did  not  keep  with  God, 

The  covenant  that  was  made  ; 
Nor  yet  would  walk  or  lead  their  lives, 
According  to  his  "  trade." 

Psalm  lxxxvii.  verse  10. 
For  why  7  their  hearts  were  nothing  bent 
To  him,  nor  to  his  "  trade." 

Psalm  ex.  verse  37. 
For  this  is  unto  Israel 
A  statute  and  a  "  trade." 

Psalm  lxxxi.  verse  4. 
And  set  all  my  commandments  light, 
And  will  not  keep  my  "trade. 

Psalm  lxxxix.  verse  32. 
To  them  be  made  a  law  and  "  trade,"  &c. 
Psalm  cxlviii.  verse  G. 

Such  stuff  as  this  you  will  find  in  other 
places.  The  words  "  more"  and  "  less"  have 
also  stood  them  in  as  good  stead  as  "  trade"  to 
make  rhyme  with,  viz  : 

All  men  on  earth,  both  "  least"  and  "  most." 

Psalm  xxiii.  verse  8- 
All  kings,  both  "  more"  and  "  less." 

Psalm  xlviii.  verse  1 1 . 
The  children  of  Israel  each  one  both  "more"  and  "  less." 

Psalm  xlviii  verse  14. 

See  also  Psalm  cix.  verse  10;  Psalm  xi. 
verse  6  ;  Psalm  xxvii.  verse  8,  &c,  &c. 

Nor  are  they  a  little  beholden  to  an  "  ever  and 
for  aye  ;"  "  for  ever  and  a  day  ;"  "  for  evermore 
always,"  and  the  like. 

Besides  their  turning  the  psalms  into  metre, 

(a)  Perhaps,  this  word  "  trade"  should  have  been  "  tradi- 
tion" with  them  ;  but  for  fear  of  a  Popish  term,  which  they 
so  much  detest  they  would  rather  write  nonsense  than  use  it.  ij 


they  also  made  rhyme  of  the  Lord's  Prayer,  the 
Creed,  and  the  Ten  Commandments.  In  which 
one  thing  is  remarkable,  viz.,  that  in  the  Creed, 
upon  the  article  of  Christ's  descent  into  hell 
they  make  a  very  plain  distinction  between  the 
hell  of  the  damned,  and  that  of  the  fathers  of 
the  Old  Testament,  Limbus  Patrv/n,  thus  : 

And  so  he  died  in  the  flesh,  but  quickened  in  the  sprite, 
His  body  then  was  buried,  as  is  our  use  and  right. 
His  soul  did  after  this  descend  into  the  lower  parts, 
A  dread  unto  the  wicked  spirits,  butjoy  to  faithful  hearts. 

Whom  do  they  mean  by  those  "  faithful  hearts," 
to  whom  our  blessed  Saviour's  descent  into  hell 
Limbus,  was  a  joy,  but  those  of  whom  the  pro- 
phet Zachary  spoke,  when  propheeying  of  our 
Saviour's  releasing  them,  he  said  :  "  Thou  also 
in  the  blood  of  thy  Testament  hast  let  forth  thy 
prisoners  out  of  the  lake,  wherein  there  is  no 
water  ?"  And,  whom  St.  Peter  meant,  when  he 
said,  that  Christ  in  spirit  "  coming,  preached  to 
the  spirits  also  that  were  in  prison ;  which  had 
been  incredulous  sometimes,  when  they  expect- 
ed the  patience  of  God  in  the  days  of  Noe, 
when  the  ark  was  in  building."  (f) 

The  turning  of  this  article  into  metre  is,  I 
suppose,  the  very  cause  why  we  have  not  the 
Creed  printed  in  metre  in  their  latter  impres- 
sions ;  and  consequently,  none  of  the  other  pray- 

(b)  By  singing  thus,  they  would  possess  the  people  that 
even  the  most  ignorant  of  them  are  capable  to  understand 
the  scripture  when  they  read  it,  or  have  it  read  to  them. 

(c)  Why  is  all  this  added  1  only  for  the  sake  of  rhyming 
to  the  word  "  name,"  unless  they  would  make  Isaac  a 
sect  maker,  and  his  religion  a  sect  like  their  own. 

(d)  If  brown  bread  is  the  bread  of  affliction,  a  great 
many  feeds  on  it  who  are  able  to  buy  white. 

(e)  How  grass  can  withpr  before  it  grows,  is  a  paradox. 
(/)  Zach.  ix.  11. 


PROTESTANT    TRANSLATIONS    Of    THE    SCRIPTURE. 


Ill 


ers  and  rhymes,  which  iheir  first  Bibles  had 
after  the  Psalms  ;  because  to  put  out  this  and 
no  more,  would  have  given  too  shrewd  a  cause 
of  suspicion. 

Besides  the  turning  of  these  into  metre,  they 
made  also  certain  other  prayers  of  their  own  in 
rhyme  ;  in  one  of  which  they  rank  the  Pope, 
whom  their  modern  divines  count  a  great  bishop, 
and  chief  patriarch  of  the  western  church,  and 
from  whom  they  pretend  to  receive  their  episcopal 
and  priestly  character,  in  the  same  list  with  the 
Turk,  as  if  both  were  infidels  alike,  and  both 
alike  enemies  to  Christ.  Robert  Wisdom  thus 
sets  out  his  psalm,  which  the  ignorant  people 
may  be  apt  to  take  for  one  of  Davids  ;  assuring 
themselves  that  David  himself  prayed  to  be  de- 
livered from  the  Turk  and  the  Pope,  and  conse- 
quently, that  the  Pope  is  a  dangerous  creature  : 

Preserve  us,  Lord,  by  thy  dear  word, 
From  Turk  and  Pope  defend  us,  Lord, 
Which  both  would  thrust  out  of  his  throne, 
Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  thy  dear  Son. 

But  this,  with  such  other  like  stuff,  is  also  left 
out  by  Protestants  in  their  last  impressions,  as  j 
being  indeed  ashamed  of  the  impiety,  malice, 
and  folly  of  these  gross  imposters,  especially  of 
this  Robert  Wisdom,  who,  notwithstanding  his 
name,  was  doubtless  the  most  ignorant  of  all 
those  who  ever  undertook  to  turn  psalm  into 
metre.  And  so  it  is  likely  he  was  looked  upon 
by  Dr.  Corbet,  sometimes  bishop  of  Norwich, 
when  he  made  the  following  address  to  his  ghost : 

TO    THE    GHOST    OF    ft.    WISDOM. 

That  once  a  body,  now  but  air, 
Arch-botchcr  of  a  psalm  or  prayer, 

From  Carfax  (a)  come, 
And  patch  us  up  a  zealous  lay, 
With  an  old  ever  and  for  aye, 

Or  all  and  some. 

Or  such  a  spirit  lend  me, 

As  may  an  hymn  down  send  me, 

To  purge  my  brain. 
Then  Robin  look  behind  thee, 
Lest  Turk  or  Pope  do  find  thee, 
And  go  to  bed  again. 

This  may  seem  too  light  for  a  treatise  of  this 
nature  ;  but  the  ridiculous  absurdity  of  these 
rhymes,  the  singing  of  which  in  the  churches, 
has,  by  several  learned  Protestants,  been  com- 
plained of  and  lamented,  cannot  be  fully  enough 
exposed  ;  that  so,  if  possible,  the  common  peo- 
ple's eyes  maybe  opened,  and  they  may  be  taken 
off  from  the  fondness  they  seem  to  have  for 
them. 

Though  the  ignorance,  rather  than  ill  inten- 
tion of  these  busy  poets  appear  in  their  psalm- 
metre  ;  yet  what  follows  cannot  be  excused 
from  being  done  with  a  very  treacherous  design 
of  the  translators  ;  for  what  can  possibly  be  a 
more  sly  piece  of  rjraft  to  deceive  the  ignorant 
reader,  than  to  use  Catholic  terms  in  all  such 
places  where  they  may  render  them  odious,  and 
when  they  must  needs  sound  ill  in  the  people's 
ears  ?    For  example,  2  Maccabees  vi.  7,  this  term 


(a)  The  place  of  his  burial  in  Oxford. 


"  procession"  they  very  maliciously  translate, 
saying  :  "  When  the  feast  of  Bacchus  was  kept, 
they  were  constrained  to  go  in  procession  to 
Bacchus."  Let  the  reader  see  in  the  Greek 
Lexicon  if  there  be  any  thing  in  this  word, 
Tiofinadveiv  iw  Siovvaoj,  like  the  Catholic  Church's 
processions,  or  whether  it  signify  so  much  as 
"  to  go  about,"  as  other  of  their  Bibles  translate 
it,  with  perhaps  no  less  ill  meaning  than  that  of 
1570,  though  they  name  not  procession,  (b) 

St.  John,  ix.  22,  25,  where,  for  "  He  should 
be  put  out  of  the  synagogue,"  there  first  transla- 
tions read  :  "  He  should  be  excommunicated,"  to 
make  the  Jews'  doings  against  them,  that  con- 
fessed Christ,  sound  like  the  Catholic  Church's 
acting  against  heretics,  in  excommunicaling 
them ;  as  if  the  church's  excommunication  of 
such,  from  the  society  and  participation  of  the 
faithful,  were  like  to  that  exterior  putting  out 
of  the  synagogue.  And  by  this  they  designed 
to  disgrace  the  priest's  power  of  excommunica- 
tion, whereas  the  Jews  had  no  such  spiritual  ex- 
communication ;  but,  as  the  word  only  signifies, 
did  put  them  out  of  the  synagogue  ;  and  so  they 
should  have  translated  the  Greek  word,  includ- 
ing the  very  name  synagogue.  But  this  trans- 
lation was  made  when  the  excommunications 
of  the  Catholic  church  were  daily  denounced 
against  them,  which  they  have  corrected  in  their 
last  Bible,  because  themselves  have  begun  to 
assume  such  a  power  of  excommunicating  their 
non-conforming  brethren. 

In  Acts  xrii.  23,  for  "  seeing  your  idols,"  or 
"  seeing  the  things  which  you  Athenians  did 
worship,"  they  translate,  "  seeing  your  devo- 
tions," as  though  devotion  and  superstition  were 
all  one. 

And  verse  24,  for  "  temples  of  Diana,"  they 
translate  "  shrines  of  Diana,"  to  make  the 
shrines  of  saints'  bodies,  and  other  holy  relics, 
seem  odious  ;  whereas  the  Greek  word  signifies 
temples.  And  Beza  says:  "  He  cannot  see  how 
it  can  signify  shrines." 

Thus  they  make  use  of  Catholic  words  and 
terms,  where  they  can  thereby  possibly  render 
them  odious  ;  but  in  other  places,  lest  the  an- 
cient words  and  names  should  still  be  retained, 
they  change  them  into  their  own  unaccustomed 
and  original  sound.  So  in  the  Old  Testament, 
out  of  an  itch  to  show  their  skill  in  the  Hebrew, 
the  first  translators  thought  fit  to  change  most  of 
the  proper  names  from  the  usual  reading,  never 
considering  how  far  differently  proper  names  of 
all  sorts  are  both  written  and  sounded  in  differ- 
ent languages  ;  but  this  is  in  a  great  part  rectified 
by  the  last  translators,  according  to  the  directions 
of  king  James  the  First,  that  in  translating  the 
proper  names,  they  should  retain  the  usual  and 
accustomed  manner  of  speaking. 

Their  altering  of  these  proper  names  in  the 
Old  Tastament,  through  the  pride  of  being  es- 
teemed such  knowing  masters  in  the  Hebrew, 
was  yet  much  more  tolerable,  than  the  changing 
of  many  other  words  in  the  New,  through  an 


(b)  Bib.  1562,  1577. 


113 


A    VINDICATION    OF 


heretical  intention  of  introducing  an  utter  obli- 
vion of  them  among  the  people. 

The  words  "  church,  bishop,  priest,  altar, 
eucharist,  sacrifice,  grace,  sacrament,  baptism, 
penance,  angel,  apostle,  Christ,  &c,  at  their 
first  revolt,  they  suppressed,  and  changed  into 
"  congregation,  superintendent,  elder  and  minis- 
ter, table,  thanksgiving,  gift,  mystery,  washing, 
repentance,  messenger,  ambassador,  anointed  ;" 
several  other  words  and  phrases  they  likewise 
altered,  as  is  evident  from  what  goes  before. 
And  for  what  cause  was  all  this  change  and  al- 
teration of  Catholic  terms  and  phrases,  but  that 
the  sound  of  the  words  should  vanish  with  the 
substance  of  the  things  which  they  have  taken 
away  ?  With  bishops  they  banished  the  pastoral 
care  and  charge  of  the  Pope  and  Catholic  bish- 
ops, and  set  up  a  child  and  a  woman  for  the 
heads  of  their  congregation.  With  priests  went 
away  the  office  of  priest,  in  offering  the  holy 
sacrifice  of  Christ's  body  and  blood  ;  with  grace 
went  away  the  sacrament  of  holy  orders,  and 
four  or  five  of  the  other  sacraments  ;  with  altar, 
eucharist  and  sacrifice,  they  excluded  the  proper 
service  of  Almighty  God,  with  Christ's  sacred 
presence  in  the  blessed  sacrament ;  with  the 
word  penance  they  banished  confession,  absolu- 
tion, and  satisfaction  for  sins  ;  they  altered  the 
word  church,  because  they  had  cut  themselves 
off  from  the  Catholic  church.  And  what  other 
design  could  we  suppose  them  to  have  had  in 
leaving  out  apostles,  and  putting  in  ambassadors 
or  legates  ;  in  leaving  out  angels,  and  introduc- 
ing messengers  ;  in  putting  down  the  word 
anointed,  where  Christ  used  to  be  read  ;  and  in 
translating  grave  for  hell ;  but  in  time  to  ex- 
tinguish all  faith  and  memory  of  apostle,  angel, 
heaven,  hell,  Christ,  and  Christianity  ;"  and  to 
bring  them  to  atheism  and  infidelity,  the  very 
centre  to  which  their  reformation  tends  1  (a) 


This  fantastical  and  impious  vanity,  in  chang- 
ing Catholic  and  Christian  terms  and  speeches 
into  their  profane  and  heathenish  use  and  signi- 
fication, was  a  thing  so  detested,  even  by  Beza 
himself,  notwithstanding  his  often  being  guilty 
of  the  same,  that  he  inveighs  against  it,  and 
those  who  use  it,  in  this  manner  :  "  The  world 
is  now  come  to  that  pass,"  says  he,  "  that  not 
only  they  who  write  their  own  discourses,  re- 
fuse the  familiar  and  accustomed  words  of  scrip- 
ture, as  obscure,  unsavoury,  and  out  of  use,  but 
also  those  that  translate  the  scripture  out  of 
Greek  into  Latin,  challenge  to  themselves  the 
like  liberty  ;  so  as  while  every  man  will  rather 
freely  follow  his  own  judgment  than  religiously 
behave  himself  as  the  Holy  Ghost's  interpreter, 
many  things  they  do  not  convert,  but  pervert , 
for  which  licentiousness  and  boldness,  except 
remedy  be  provided  in  time,  either  I  am  notably 
deceived,  or  within  a  few  years,  instead  of  Chris- 
tians we  shall  become  Ciceronians,  i.  e.  Pagans, 
and  by  little  and  little  shall  lose  the  possession 
of  the  things  themselves."  (b)  By  this  you  see, 
that  though  Beza  was  one  of  the  greatest  mas- 
ters in  this  wanton,  novel,  and  licentious  art  of 
changing  Christian  for  Heathen  terms  and 
phrases,  yet  he  foresaw  that  in  the  end,  with  the 
words,  would  be  taken  away  the  things  signified, 
'*  sacraments,  baptism,  eucharists,  priesthood, 
sacrifice,  angels,  apostles,  and  all  apostolical 
doctrine  ;"  and  that  so  we  should  be  brought 
again  from  Christianity  to  heathenism. 

From  which,  and  from  the  Stilungfleetian 
error,  (c)  that,  by  asserting,  M  The  pagan  god, 
Jupiter,  to  be  the  true  God,  blessed  for  ever, 
more,"  throws  open  the  door  of  Jupiter's  temple, 
and  points  out  the  very  pathway  to  paganism, 

COOD   LORD,   DELIVER   US  ' 


A  VINDICATION  OF  THE  ROMAN  CATHOLICS 


AS  ALSO  THEIR  DECLARATION,  AFFIRMATION,  COMMINATION  ;  SHOWING  THEIR  ABHORRENCE 
OF  THE  FOLLOWING  TENETS,  COMMONLY  LAID  AT  THEIR  DOOR.  AND  THEY  HERE  OBLIGE 
THEMSELVES,  THAT  IF  THE  ENSUING  CURSES  BE  ADDED  TO  THOSE  APPOINTED  TO  BE 
READ  ON  THE  FIRST  DAY  OF  LENT,  THEY  WILL  SERIOUSLY  AND  HEARTILY  ANSWER  AMEN 
TO  THEM  ALL. 


1.  Cursed  is  he  that  commits  idolatry  ;  that 
prays  to  images  or  relics,  or  worships  them  for 
God.      R.  Amen. 

2.  Cursed  is  every  goddess  worshipper,  that 
believes  the  Virgin  Mary  to  be  any  more  than  a 
creature  ;  that  honours  her,  worships  her,  or 
puts  his  trust  in  her  more  than  in  God  ;  that  be- 
lieves her  above  her  Son,  or  that  she  can  in  any- 
thing command  him.     R.  Amen. 

3.  Cursed  is  he  that  believes  the  saints  in 
heaven  to  be  his  redeemers,  and  prays  to  them 
as  such,  or  that  gives  God's  honour  to  them,  or 
to  any  creature  whatsoever.     R.  Amen. 

4.  Cursed   is  he  that  worships  any  breaden 


(a)  Change  of  words  induces  change  of  faith. 


god,  or  makes   gods  of  the  empty  elements  of 
bread  and  wine.     R.  Amen. 

5.  Cursed  is  he  that  believes  priests  can  for- 
give sins  whether  the  sinner  repent  or  not :  or 
that  there  is  any  power  in  earth  or  heaven  that 
can  forgive  sins,  without  a  hearty  repentance 
and  serious  purpose  of  amendment.     R.  Amen. 

6.  Cursed  is  he  that  believes  there  is  authority 
in  the  Pope  or  any  others,  that  can  give  leave  to 
commit  sins  ;  or  that  can  forgive  him  his  sins 
for  a  sum  of  money.     R.  Amen. 

7.  Cursed  is  he  that  believes  that,  independently 

(6)  Beza  in  Act.  x.  46,  edit  anno  1556,  but  in  the  lat- 
ter ed.  of  15G5,  some  of  these  words  are  altered  either  by 
himself  or  the  printer. 

(c)  Dr.  Stillingfleet's  Charge  of  Idolatry  against  the 
Church  of  Rome,  p.  7,  and  p.  40. 


THE  ROMAN  CATHOLICS. 


113 


oi  the  merits  and  passion  of  Christ,  he  can  merit 
salvation  by  his  own  good  works  ;  or  make  con- 
dign satisfaction  for  the  guilt  of  his  sins,  or  the 
pains  eternal  due  to  them.     R.  Amen. 

8.  Cursed  is  he  that  contemns  the  word  of 
God,  or  hides  it  from  the  people,  on  design  to 
keep  them  from  the  knowledge  of  their  duty, 
and  to  preserve  them  in  ignorance  and  error. 
R.  Amen. 

9.  Cursed  is  he  that  undervalues  the  word  of 
God,  or  that  forsaking  scripture  chooses  rather 
to  follow  human  traditions  than  it.     R.  Amen. 

10.  Cursed  is  he  that  leaves  the  command- 
ments of  God,  to  observe  the  constitutions  of 
men.    R.  Amen. 

11.  Cursed  is  he  that  omils  any  of  the  Ten 
Commandments,  or  keeps  the  people  from  the 
knowledge  of  any  one  of  them,  to  the  end  that 
they  may  not  have  occasion  of  discovering  the 
truth.     R.  Amen. 

12.  Cursed  is  he  that  preaches  to  the  people 
in  unknown  tongues,  such  as  they  understand 
not ;  or  uses  any  other  means  to  keep  them  in 
ignorance.     R.  Amen. 

13.  Cursed  is  he  that  believes  that  the  Pope 
can  give  to  any,  upon  any  account  whatsoever, 
dispensation  to  lie  or  swear  falsely  ;  or  that  it  is 
lawful  for  any,  at  the  last  hour,  to  protest  him- 
self innocent  in  case  he  be  guilty.     R.  Amen. 

14.  Cursed  is  he  that  encourages  sins,  or 
teaches  men  to  defer  the  amendment  of  their 
lives,  on  presumption  of  their  death-bed  repen- 
tance.    R.  Amen. 

15.  Cursed  is  he  that  teaches  men  that  they 
may  be  lawfully  drunk  on  a  Friday  or  any  other 
fasting-day,  though  they  must  not  taste  the  least 
bit  of  flesh.     R.  Amen. 

16.  Cursed  is  he  who  places  religion  in 
nothing  but  a  pompous  show,  consisting  only  in 
ceremonies  ;  and  which  teaches  not  the  people 
to  serve  God  in  spirit  and  truth.     R.  Amen. 

1 7.  Cursed  is  he  who  loves  or  promotes 
cruelty,  that  teaches  people  to  be  bloody-mind- 
ed, and  to  lay  aside  the  meekness  of  Jesus  Christ. 
R.  Amen. 

18.  Cursed  is  he  who  teaches  that  it  is  law- 
ful to  do  any  wicked  thing,  though  it  be  for  the 
interest  and  good  of  mother  church  :  or  that  any 
evil  action  may  be  done  that  good  may  come  of 
it.     R.  Amen. 

19.  Cursed  are  we,  if  amongst  all  these 
wicked  principles  and  damnable  doctrines  com- 
monly laid  at  our  doors,  any  one  of  them  be 
the  faith  of  our  church  ;  and  cursed  are  we,  if 
we  do  not  as  heartily  detest  all  those  hellish 
practices  as  those  who  so  vehemently  urge  them 
against  us.     R.  Amen. 

20.  Cursed  are  we,  if  in  answering,  and  saying 
Amen  to  any  of  these  curses,  we  use  any  equivo- 
cation, mental  reservation  ;  or  do  not  assent  to 
them  in  the  common  and  obvious  sense  of  the 
words.     R.  Amen. 

And  can  the  Papists  then,  thus  seriously,  and 


without  check  of  conscience,  say  Amen  to  all 
these  curses  ? 

Yes,  they  can,  and  are  ready  to  do  it  whenso- 
ever, and  as  often  as  it  shall  be  required  of  them. 
And  what  then  is  to  be  said  of  those  who  either 
by  word  or  writing,  charge  these  doctrines  upon 
the  faith  of  the  Church  of  Rome  ?  "  Is  a  lying 
spirit  in  the  mouth  of  all  the  prophets  ?  are  they 
all  gone  aside  ?  do  they  backbite  with  their 
tongues,  do  evil  to  their  neighbour,  and  take  up 
reproach  against  their  neighbour  ?"  I  will  say  no 
such  thing,  but  leave  the  impartial  considerer  to 
judge.  One  thing  I  can  safely  affirm,  that  the 
"  Papists"  are  foully  misrepresented,  and  show  in 
public  as  much  unlike  what  they  are,  as  the 
Christians  were  of  old  by  the  Gentiles  ;  that  they 
lie  under  a  great  calumny,  and  severely  smart  in 
good  name,  persons,  and  estates,  for  such  things 
which  they  as  much  and  as  heartily  detest  as  those 
who  accuse  them.  But  the  comfort  is,  Christ 
has  said  to  his  followers  :  "  Ye  shall  be  hated  of 
all  men."  (Math.  x.  22,)  and  St.  Paul :  "  We 
are  made  a  spectacle  unto  the  world ;"  and  we 
do  not  doubt,  that  he  who  bears  this  with  pa- 
tience, shall  for  every  loss  here  and  contempt 
receive  a  hundred-fold  in  heaven  :  "  For  the  base 
things  of  the  world,  and  things  which  are  de- 
spised, hath  God  chosen."     1   Corinth,  i.  28. 

As  for  problematical  disputes,  or  errors  of 
particular  divines,  in  this,  or  any  other  matter 
whatsoever,  the  Catholic  Church  is  no  way  re- 
sponsible for  them  ;  nor  are  Catholics,  as  Catho- 
lics, justly  punishable  on  their  accouut.     But, 

As  for  the  king-killing  doctrine,  or  murder  of 
princes,  excommunicated  for  heresy  ;  it  is  an  ar- 
ticle of  faith  in  the  Catholic  Church,  and  ex- 
pressly declared  in  the  General  Council  of  Con- 
stance, sess.  15,  that  such  doctrine  is  damnable 
and  heretical,  being  contrary  to  the  known  laws 
of  God  and  nature. 

Personal  misdemeanors  of  what  nature  soever, 
ought  not  to  be  imputed  to  the  Catholic  Church, 
when  not  justifiable  by  the  tenets  of  her  faith  and 
doctrine.  For  which  reason,  though  the  stories 
of  the  Paris  massacre  ;  the  Irish  cruelties,  or 
powder-plot,  had  been  exactly  true,  (which  yet 
for  the  most  parts  are  mis-related)  nevertheless 
Catholics  as  Catholics,  ought  not  to  suffer  for 
such  offences,  any  more  than  the  eleven  apostles 
ought  to  have  suffered  for  Judas's  treachery. 

It  is  an  article  of  the  Catholic  faith  to  believe, 
that  no  power  on  earth  can  license  men  to  lie, 
forswear,  and  perjure  themselves,  to  massacre 
their  neighbours,  or  destroy  their  native  country, 
on  pretence  of  promoting  the  Catholic  cause,  or 
religion.  Furthermore,  all  pardons  and  dispen- 
sations granted,  or  pretended  to  be  granted,  in 
order  to  any  such  ends  or  designs,  have  no  other 
validity  or  effect,  than  to  add  sacrilege  and 
blasphemy  to  the  above-mentioned  crimes. 

Sweet  Jesus,  bless  our  sovereign :  pardon 
our  enemies.  Grant  us  patience  ;  and  establish 
peace  and  charity  in  our  nation. 


VERSION  OF  THE  ENGLISH  BIBLE  : 


A  VINDICATION  OF  WARD  S  ERRATA,  IN  REPLY  TO  GRIER,  BY  THE  RIGHT  REV.  DR.  MILNER. 


Dear  Sir — You  have  witnessed  the  failure  of 
our  vicar  in  his  attempt  to  vindicate  the  canon 
of  scripture,  without  recourse  to  the  authority 
of  tradition,  and  this  on  Protestant,  as  well  as 
on  Catholic  grounds.  As  to  the  other  point, 
which  he  says  he  is  equally  called  upon  to  prove, 
on  the  same  condition  of  net  recurring  to  tra- 
dition, namely  :  "  Which  are  the  books  that  have 
been  written  by  Divine  inspiration,  and,  indeed, 
that  any  books  at  all  have  been  so  written, "(a) 
he  entirely  gives  it  up,  in  the  following  terms  : 
"  To  pronounce  with  confidence  what  books  of 
the  canon,  or  parts  of  books,  are  inspired,  and 
what  not,  may  consistently  belong  to  Dr.  M., 
as  being  a  member  of  a  church  which  lays  claim 
to  infallibility  ;  but  certainly  not  to  a  member 
of  the  Church  of  England.  So  that  when  he 
asks,  how  we  have  learned,  what  books  have  been 
written  by  Divine  inspiration,  or  that  any  boohs 
at  all  have  been  so  written  ?  we  may  answer  that, 
where  the  holy  scriptures  declare  that  they  set 
forth  a  divine  revelation,  or  that  they  express 
the  word  of  God,  we  believe  them  to  do  so  : 
[thus  again  grounding  a  thing  to  be  proved  upon 
itself!]  but  as  to  the  fact  of  their  inspiration, 
we  must,  with  awe  and  humility,  decline  to  say, 
what  we  believe  no  church,  ancient  or  modern, 
can  attest. "(b)  If  this  were  so,  I  would  ask 
the  vicar,  of  what  great  use  is  the  scripture 
more  than  any  other  good  book  1  and  why  is  it 
called  the  word  of  God  ?  Again,  with  what 
consistency  does  the  Church  of  England  appeal 
to  it,  in  her  Articles,  as  her  only  rule  of  faith  ? 
But  the  vicar's  ideas  are  evidently  confused  on 
the  subject,  and  therefore,  he  hastens  to  another 
more  familiar  to  him,  since  he  has  already  pub- 
lished a  quarto  volume  on  the  fidelity  of  the 
English  Bible.  However,  as  the  fifty  pages  he 
spends  upon  it  in  the  present  work,  consist,  for 
the  most  part,  of  mere  declamation  in  praise  of 
the  translation,  its  authors,  and  himself,  together 
with  proportional  abuse  of  its  critics,  and  Dr.  M., 
(a  style  in  which  I  will  not  contend  with  the 
Rev.  Gentleman,)  I  hope  to  be  able  to  confine 
my  reflections  within  much  narrower  bounds 
than  he  confines  his. 

The  vicar  begins  his  declamation,  dear  Sir, 
with  unlimited  abuse  of  your  correspondent. 
This  he  carries  on  through  the  greater  part  of 
ten  pages,  reproaching  me  with,  ignorance,  super- 
ciliousness, arrogance,  superficialness,  <yc  (c)    In 


(a)  Reply,  p.  2. 

lb)  P.  9. 

(c)  P.  61,  et  seq. 


short,  he  says,  that  "  Dr.  M.  cannot  stand  a 
competition,  on  the  score  of  learning  and  talents, 
with  even  the  obscurest,"  of  the  fifty-four  clergy- 
men who  were  named  in  the  reign  of  James  I., 
to  make  a  new  version  of  the  scripture,  though 
he  confesses  there  are  five  amongst  them  of 
whom  he  knows  nothing  at  all,  and  some  others, 
of  whom  he  has  barely  learned  something  from 
the  late  Dr.  Todd.(d)  To  this  abuse  I  am  content 
to  answer,  that  as  the  vicar  knows  nothing  of 
me  or  my  attainments,  but  what  he  learns  from 
my  publications,  which,  together  with  his  own, 
are  before  the  world,  so  our  respective  charac- 
ters for  learning  and  talents  will  not  be  decided 
upon  by  what  we  may  say  of  ourselves,  but  by 
what  others  may  judge  of  us. 

The  very  profession  of  the  vicar,  which  is  to 
vindicate,  at  the  same  time  Tyndal's  translation 
of  the  Bible,  and  king  James's  correction  of  it, 
as  being  both  of  them  faultless,  carries  with  it 
its  own  refutation,  and  betrays  his  insincerity 
and  spirit  of  chicanery.  His  fellow-labourer, 
Dr.  Ryan,  whose  Analysis  of  Ward's  Errata(e) 
he  has  commended,  "  as  decisive  to  the  extent 
it  goes,"(/)  very  fairly  gives  up  several  corrup- 
tions of  the  sacred  text,  which  disgraced  Tyn- 
dal's and  the  other  early  translations  and  edi- 
tions of  the  English  Bible,  during  more  than 
fifty  years,  as  indefensible.  Thus,  for  example, 
speaking  of  Ward,  he  says  :  "  He  produces  seven 
texts  to  show  that  we  mistranslated  our  Bible, 
for  the  purpose  of  injuring  his  church,  and  to 
excuse  our  apostacy  from  it ;  but  the  former 
mistranslations  of  these  seven  texts  having  been 
corrected  in  our  present  Bible,  should  have  been 
excluded  from  his  catalogue  of  errata. "(g) 
With  the  same  fairness  Dr.  Ryan  says  :  "  He 
(Ward)  produces  eight  texts,  which  he  accuses 
us  of  misconstruing  against  the  sacrament  and 
mass  ;  but  five  of  the  eight  having  been  correc- 
ted in  our  version,  agreeably  to  his  own,  should 
have  been  excluded  from  the  book. "(A)     The 


(d)  P.  66.         (e)  Dublin,  1808.         (/ )  Reply,  p.  94. 

(g)  Analysis,  p.  10.  In  Tyndal's  translation,  and  the 
editions  of  1562,  1577,  1579,  instead  of  the  word  church, 
the  word  congregation  is  used  in  the.  following  manner : 
Thou  art  Peter,  and  upon  this  rock  will  I  build  my  con- 
gregation, Mat.  xvi.  18.  If  he  will  not  hear  them,  tell  the 
congregation  ;  and  if  he  will  not  hear  the  congregation, 
let  him  be  to  thee  as  a  heathen,  &c.  Mat.  xviii.  17. 

{h)  Ibid.,  p.  12.  In  two  of  these  passages,  Mat.  xxvi. 
and  Mark  xiv.  22,  instead  of  saying  :  Jesus  blessed  the 
bread,  the  old  editions  say:  Having  given  thanks.  In 
two  other  passages,  1  Cor.  ix.  13,  and  3  Cor.  x.  18,  the 
word  temple  is  used,  instead  of  altar,  to  exclude  the 
idea  of  a  sacrifice  under  the  new  law. 


VERSION"    OE    THE    ENGLISH     BIBLE. 


115 


Doctor  proceeds  :  "  Our  opponent  (Ward) 
charges  us  with  misconstruing  twelve  texts,  for 
the  purpose  of  proving  Catholics  guilty  of  idol- 
atry." But  six  of  the  twelve  being  corrected  in 
our  Bible,  ought  to  have  been  omitted  "  in  his 
list."  (a)  In  a  word,  this  advocate  of  the  Eng- 
lish Bible  challenges  the  Popish  doctors,  as  he 
calls  them,  to  answer  him  this  question  :  "  Did 
not  the  translators  of  our  Bible  of  the  year  1683, 
correct  forty  errors  in  our  old  ones  ?  (£)  Such 
is  the  acknowledgment  of  Dr.  Ryan,  writing 
in  defence  of  the  English  Bible,  against  the 
learned  cavalier  Thomas  Ward ;  but  the  Rev. 
Mr.  Grier  undertakes  equally  to  vindicate  the 
pld  version  and  the  new  one,  the  corrected  and 
the  uncorrected  text ;  and  even  in  those  very 
passages  in  which  the  infidelity  of  the  latter  is 
most  glaring,  and  obnoxious  to  the  English 
Church  as  well  as  to  the  Catholic  Church.  For 
example,  he  defends  Tyndal  and  his  followers 
in  the  use  of  the  word  congregation,  for  that  of 
church,  affirming  that,  in  so  doing,  "  they  did 
not  depart  from  the  letter  or  the  meaning  of 
the  Holy  Ghost."  (c)  In  a  word,  he  pronounces, 
with  Seidell's  Table- Talker,  that  "  the  English 
translation  of  the  Bible  is  the  best  in  the  world, 
and  which  renders  the  sense  of  the  original  the 
best  ;  taking  in  for  the  English  translation  the 
Bishop's  Bible  as  well  as  king  James's ;"  ad- 
ding :  "  The  bishops  made  the  preceding  Eng- 
lish versions  of  Tyndal  and  Coverdale,  the 
models  and  as  it  were  the  basis  of  their  own." 
(d)  Thus  then,  according  to  the  vicar,  the  ver- 
sion of  the  Lutheran  Tyndal  from  the  Latin 
Vulgate,  of  the  Calvinist  Coverdale,  from  the 
Vulgate  and  the  Greek,  (e)  and  the  corrected 
version  of  the  English  divines  from  the  Hebrew 
and  the  Greek,  though  often  differing  from  each 
other  in  meaning,  as  well  as  in  other  respects, 
are  each  of  them  "  the  best  translation  in  the  world, 
and  renders  the  sense  of  the  original  the  best." 

The  vicar,  as  might  be  expected,  speaks  in 
high  terms  of  Tyndal,  whom  John  Fox  calls 
England's  apostle,  and  with  equal  censure  of  his 
great  antagonist,  Sir  Thomas  More.  Had  the 
vicar  read  and  faithfully  exhibited  the   former's 

(a)  Ibid.  p.  24.  The  following  are  some  of  the  old 
corruptions,  which  have  been  since  corrected,  according 
to  the  original,  and  the  Rheims  Testament,  Coloss.  iii.  b, 
Covetousness,  tch'tch  is  the  worshipping  of  images,  Ephes. 
v.  5 ;  2  Cor.  vi.  16,  How  agrceth  the  temple  of  God  with 
iviaues  ?  1  John  v.  21,  Babes,  keep  yourselves  from  images. 

(b)  P.  62.  To  this  the  Catholic  Doctors  answer  in  the 
affirmative.  But  they  add  first,  that  the  very  circumstance 
of  their  being  corrected  by  Protestants,  is  a  proof  that 
the  latter  acknowledged  them  to  be  errors  :  secondly,  that 
after  the  forty  corrections  in  question  have  been  made,  a 
still  greater  number  of  corrections  remain  to  be  made. 

(c)  Answer  to  Ward's  Errata,  by  the  Rev.  R.  Grier, 
1812,  p.  2.  To  this,  his  former  work,  the  vicar  refers  in 
his  present  Reply,  with  his  usual  modesty,  as  follows  :  "  I 
trust  the  readers  of  my  Answer  will  credit  the  truth  of  the 
assertion,  that  my  publication,  comprising,  as  it  does,  the 
ablest  arguments  of  our  most  learned  divines,  contains  a 
full  and  victorious  refutation  of  pernicious  error ;  and 
that  I  have  successfully  established  the  superior  merit  of 
our  standing  English  text,  no  less  than  its  fidelity." — 
Reply,  p.  94.  (,/)  P.  76. 

(e)  Coverdale  had  the  chief  hand  in  the  Geneva  edition, 
which  was  so  obnoxious  to  the  Church  of  England,  that 
the  prelates  of  the  establishment  constantly  oppose  its 
publication,  as  may  be  seen  in  Strype. 


books,  called,  The  Wicked  Mammon,  The  True 
Obedience,  and  The  Answere  to  Syr  T.  More, 
together  with  the  latter's  Confutacion  of  Tyn- 
dale's  Answere,  dfc,  1  am  convinced  he  must 
have  lowered  his  tone  of  panegyric  with  respect 
to  Tyndal  into  that  of  extenuation,  at  least,  as 
he  would  have  found  this  pretended  apostle's 
language  to  be  no  less  seditious  than  it  is  hetero- 
dox, and  no  less  injurious  to  the  present  Church 
of  England,  than  it  was  to  that  of  former  times. 
With  the  most  specious  pretentions  to  charity 
and  submission,  he  terms,  at  every  turn,  those 
who  were  most  dignified  and  venerated  in  church 
and  state,  "  apish,  pivish,  popish  jugglers,  thieves, 
murtherers,  blood-suppers,  Pilates,  Herods, 
priapists,  sodomites,  hangmen,  Christ-killers, 
devils,  &c."  (/)  The  learned  and  dignified 
author,  quoted  below,  points  out,  "  amonge  other 
tokens  of  Tyndale's  evill  intent  in  hys  transla- 
cion,  for  enswample,  that  he  chaunged  common- 
lye  this  woorde  churche  into  this  woorde  congre- 
gacion,  and  this  woorde  priest  into  this  woorde 
seniour ;  and  charitie  into  love,  and  grace  into 
favour,  confession  into  knowledge,  and  penaunce 
and  repentance,  with  wordes  mo,  which  he 
chaunged  and  useth  dayly,  as  in  turning  ydolcs 
into  ymages,  and  anonynting  into  smering,  conse- 
crating into  charming  sacramentes  into  cere- 
monys,  and  ceremonys  into  witchccraftc,  and  yet 
many  moe."  (g)  Notwithstanding  John  Fox  at- 
tributes a  splendid  miracle  (in  rendering  void 
the  enchantment  of  a  certain  magician,)  to  the 
sanctity  of  Tyndal,  (h)  he  is  far  from  succeed- 
ing in  vindicating  his  religious  or  his  moral 
principals.  (?)  It  appears  that,  though  Cover- 
dale  encouraged  his  disciple  Frith  to  die  for  his 
belief,  yet,  it  is  plain,  from  his  story,  that  he 
himself  suffered  death,  not  for  that,  or  his  Eng- 
lish translation  of  the  Bible,  but  for  treasonable 
practises  against  the  government  of  the  Low 
Countries,  under  which  he  lived.  But  why  does 
not  the  vicar  honour  the  name  of  the  above-men- 
tioned Frith,  who  had  so  large  a  share  in  his 
master  Tyndal's  Bible,  with  a  single  notice  ?  I 
can  conceive  no  other  motive  for  this,  except 
that,  when  he  was  burnt  in  Henry's  reign,  for 
denying  the  Catholic  doctrine  of  the  sacrament, 
archbishop  Cranmer  had  the  chief  hand  in  bring- 
ing him  to  the  stake.  The  vicar,  however,  makes 
amends  for  this  omission,  by  the  lofty  praises  he 
heaps  on  the  "  venerable  Coverdale,"  as  he  calls 
him,  who  was  the  most  conspicuous  character 
in  giving  the  early  editions  of  the  English  Bible. 
This  apostate  friar  was  of  the  same  religious 
order  with  Luther,  and,  like  him,  broke  through 
his  solemn  vow  of  continency,  by  taking  to  him- 
self a  pretended  wife,  during  the  confusion  of 
Edward's  reign,  at  which  time  also  he  became 
bishop  of  Exeter.  Retiring  to  Geneva,  when 
Mary  mounted  the   throne,  he  sucked  in  there 


(/)  Sir  Thomas  More's  Works,  London,  1517,  p.  336. 

(g)  Syr  T.  More's  Second  Boke,  whiche  confuteth  the 
Defence  of  Tyndall,for  his  Translacion,  p  405. 

(h)  See  Acts  and  Moriani. 

(t)  This  appears  by  his  attempt  to  get  into  Bishop  Tun- 
6tal's  service,  after  he  had  declared  himself  a  Protectant, 
'■  and  by  his  constant  maxim  of,  bearing  with  the  Uvus 


116 


VERSION    OF    THE    ENGLISH    BIBLE. 


the  doctrine  and  prejudices  of  Calvin,  so  that, 
returning  to  England  when  Elizabeth  became 
queen,  he  was  neither  restored  to  his  see,  nor 
treated  as  a  bishop.  It  was  not  without  diffi- 
culty that  he  obtained  the  poor  living  of  St. 
Magnus',  near  London  Bridge,  and  he  was,  after 
some  time,  turned  out  of  that  for  non-comformity. 
The  vicar  sets  up  a  most  curious  proof  of  the 
fidelity  of  Coverdale's  biblical  labours,  which  is 
worthy,  dear  sir,  of  your  notice,  as  a  specimen 
of  the  conclusiveness  of  his  reasoning ;  it  is 
this,  Fulk  declares  as  follows  :  "  I  myself  did 
heare  that  Reverend  father,  M.  Dr.  Coverdale, 
of  holie  and  learned  memorie,  in  a  sermon  at 
St.  Paule's  Crosse,  upon  occasion  of  some 
slaunderous  reportes,  that  then  were  raised 
against  his  translation,  declare  his  faithful  pur- 
pose in  doing  the  same,  which,  after  it  was 
finished  and  presented  to  K.  Henry  VIII.,  and 
by  him  committed  to  diverse  bishops  of  that 
time  to  peruse,  of  which,  as  I  remember,  Strphrn 
Gardiner  was  one — they  being  demanded  by 
the  king,  Are  there  any  heresies  maintained 
thereby  ?  They  answered  that  there  were  no 
heresies  that  they  could  find  maintained  there- 
by." (a)  So  far  Fulke,  to  whose  account  of 
Coverdale's  sermon,  the  vicar  subjoins  the  fol- 
lowing inference :  "  This  single  admission  of 
GuTdiner  speaks  volumes !"  But,  dear  Sir,  I 
would  ask  the  -everend  gentleman  the  following 
questions  ;  Of  what  weight  is  William  Fulkc's 
account  of  Miles  Coverdale's  sermon  in  defence 
of  the  old  exploded  version  ?  Secondly,  What 
signify  Sttphcn  Gardiner's  words  concerning  it, 
or  any  other  point  during  Henry's  reign,  when  he 
was  as  abject  a  slave  to  the  religious  tyrant  as 
Crunmer  himself  was  ?  Thirdly,  What  proof  of 
the  fidelity  of  a  scriptural  translation  would  the 
decision  even  of  a  council  be,  that  it  maintained 
no  heresies  ;  when  it  might  be  found  censurable 
on  twenty  other  theological  charges  ?  And  what 
then  becomes  of  the  reverend  vicar's  volumes  of 
evidence,  for  the  purity  of  Coverdale's  version  1 
But  the  simple  fact  of  a  new  translation  of  the 
whole  scripture  having  been  set  on  foot  and  ex- 
ecuted by  authority  both  of  church  and  state,  in 
James's  reign,  is  a  proof  that  the  former  version 
of  Tyndal  and  Coverdale,  even  after  it  had 
been  corrected  by  the  bishops  was  deemed  to 
be  faulty.  That  it  did  abound  with  errors  is 
demonstrated  by  the  learned  Gregory  Martin,  in 
his  Discoverie,  &c,  whom  Fulke  in  vain  at- 
tempted to  answer.  The  same  is  again  de- 
monstrated, together  with  sufficient  proofs  that 
the  present  version  also  abounds  with  errors,  by 
the  intelligent  Thomas  Ward,  in  his  Errata, 
the  success  of  whose  undertaking  accounts 
for  the  vicar's  unbounded  abuse  of  him.  (b) 
But  what  need  is  there  of  a  further  exposure 

(a)  Reply,  p.  73. 

(b)  There  is  no  expression  of  hatred  and  contempt  too 
strong  for  the  vicar,  in  speaking  of  these  two  able  and 
learned  men,  which  is  the  best  proof  of  his  being  wound- 
ed by  their  pens,  and  his  inability  to  cope  with  them.  The 
fellow  students  of  Gregory  Martin,  at  Oxford,  bore  a  very 
different  testimony  of  his  learning  and  merit  from  that  of 
Mr.  Grier.  The  celebrated  historian  of  that  university  re- 
latei  that,  when  the  Duke  of  Norfolk,  to  whose,  eldest  son 


of  the  latter's  absurdity,  in  attempting  to  vin 
dicate  both  the  old  and  the  new  version,  the  un- 
corrected and  the  corrected  one,  and  to  prove 
that  each  of  them  is  the  best  translation  in  th* 
world,  than  the  vicar's  subsequent  comparison 
between  them,  and  the  preference  which  ho 
gives,  in  an  important  instance,  to  the  former  ?  (c) 

Proceeding  to  treat  of  the  new  version  of  the 
scriptures,  which  was  made  by  order  of  kinp 
James  I.,  more  than  seventy  years  after  the  first 
appearance  of  the  former,  the  vicar  chiefly  con- 
fines himself  to  combating  the  following  pas- 
sage in  The  End  of  Controversy,  where,  speak- 
ing of  the  Bibles,  "  which  had  been  published 
by  authority  or  generally  used  by  Protestants-  in 
this  country,"  the  author  said  :  "  Those  of  Tyn- 
dal, Coverdale,  and  queen  Elizabeth's  bishops, 
were  so  notoriously  corrupt,  as  to  cause  a  gen- 
eral outcry  against  them  among  learned  Protes- 
tants, as  well  as  among  Catholics,  in  which 
the  king  himself,  James  I.,  joined  :  and  accord- 
ingly, he  ordered  a  new  version  of  it  to  be  made, 
being  the  same  that  is  now  in  use,  w  ith  some  few 
alterations  made  in  it  after  the  restoration. "(J) 

The  vicar  commences  his  attack  on  this  pas- 
sage with  denying,  first,  that  learned  divines  of 
the  Church  of  England,  whom  alone  he  ac- 
knowledges to  be  Protestants,  objected  to  the 
old  version ;  and,  secondly,  that  the  Puritans, 
to  whom  he  refuses  that  title,  raised  an  outcry 
against  it.  But  I  would  ask  him,  whether  the 
subscribers  to  the  Millinary  Petition  to  Parlia- 
ment, who  therein  describe  themselves  to  be 
"  more  than  a  thousand  ministers,  that  had  sub- 
scribed the  service  book"  of  Common-Prayer, 
and  whose  representatives,  at  the  conference  of 
Hampton-Court,  were  Dr.  Reynolds,  and  Dr. 
Spark,  both  of  them  professors  of  Oxford  Uni- 
versity, were  not  divines  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land 1  And  whether  these  representatives  did 
not  then  and  there  petition  as  follows  ;  "  May  it 
please  your  Majesty,  that  the  Bible  be  newly 
translated,  such  as  are  extant  not  answering  the 
original,  which  he  (Dr.  Reynold's)  instanced  in 

Martin  was  then  domestic  tutor,  visited  St.  John's  College, 
he  was  greeted  with  a  public  oration,  in  which  the  orator, 
speaking  of  its  great  ornament,  Gregory  Martin  said  : 

"  Habes,  illustrissime  Dux,  Hcbrceum  nostrum ,  Gracum 

nostrum, 
Poetam  nostrum,  decus  et  sluriam  nostrnm." 

At  hen.  Oxon.,  P.  1,  Ar.  221. 

With  respect  to  Ward,  it  may  be  enough  to  say  that, 
though  a  layman,  and  a  military  man,  he  proved  himself 
to  be  an  overmatch  for  his  different  clerical  antagonists, 
one  of  whom  was  Richel,  vicar  of  Hexam;  another, 
Tennison.  A.  B.,  of  Canterbury.  See  his  Monomachia. 
His  Cantos  on  the  Reformation,  though  written  in  dogrel 
verse,  contain  such  sterling  matter,  as  to  have  caused  the 
conversion  of  many  Protestants,  and  among  others,  of 
the  late  Rev.  Roland  Davies,  C.  A.  D.  The  vicar's  pre- 
tended Answer  to  the  Errata,  was  the  prototype  to  his 
Reply  to  the  End  of  Controversy.  He  writes  much  about 
different  subjects,  and  about  them,  and  makes  many  bold 
assertions  and  denials,  but  never  once  proves  the  point 
which  he  takes  in  hand  to  prove. 

(c)  Quoting  that  foolish  book,  Set/kn's  Table-Talk,  he 
says  that  "  The  Bishop's  Bible  (the  old  translation,)  copied 
chiefly  from  Tyndal  and  Coverdale,  ranks  equally  high, 
as  a  translation,  with  king  James's,  and  either  of  them  is 
the  best  translation  in  the  world." — Reply,  p.  76. 

{d)  End  of  Controversy,  Let.  ix.,  p.  71. 


VERSION    OF    THE    ENGLISH    BIBLE. 


117 


three  particulars."  (a)  Did  not  the  Lincolnshire 
ministers  present  a  petition  to  the  king  in  De- 
cember, 1604,  complaining  that  "  the  book  of 
Common  Prayer  appoints  such  a  translation  of 
scripture  to  be  used  in  the  churches,  as  in  some 
places  is  absurd,  and  in  others,  takes  from,  per- 
verts, obscures,  and  falsifies  the  word  of  God  ; 
examples  of  which  are  produced  with  the  autho- 
rities of  the  most  considerable  reformers."  (b) 
Was  not  Broughton  of  Cambridge  an  episcopal 
Protestant,  and  "  the  greatest  scholar  of  his 
age  for  Hebrew,"  as  Strype  testifies  ?  And  yet 
he  charged  the  Bible,  authorized  in  his  time, 
(the  Bishops'  Bible)  with  "  a  great  number  of 
errors,"  which  he  called  "  traps  and  pitfalls  ;" 
adding,  in  his  letter  to  the  Lord  Treasurer, 
that  sundry  lords  and  some  bishops,  and  others 
of  inferior  rank,  had  requested  him  to  bestow 
his  labour  in  clearing  the  Bible  translations,  (c) 
Finally  the  vicar  himself  quotes  the  translators 
of  the  new  version  as  "  echoing  the  words  of  the 
king,"  when  they  state  that  "  upon  the  impor- 
tunate petition  of  the  Puritans,"  the  conference 
of  Hampton-Court  was  held,  in  which  "  they 
had  recourse  at  last  to  this  shift,  that  they  could 
not  with  good  conscience,  subscribe  to  the  Com- 
munion Book,  since  it  maintained  the  Bible  as  it 
was  there  translated,  which  was,  as  they  said, 
a  most  corrupt  translation."  (d)  I  would  now 
appeal  to  any  candid  reader,  of  whatever  reli- 
gion he  may  be,  no  less  than  to  yourself,  whether 
I  was  not  justified  in  stating,  "  there  was  an 
outcry  against  those  Bibles,  (TyndaPs,  Cover- 
dale's,  and  the  Bishops')  among  learned  Protes- 
tants, as  well  as  Catholics  ?"  It  remains  to  be 
seen  whether  "  king  James  joined  in  it  or  not  V 
The  vicar  is  forced  to  acknowledge  the  truth 
of  Fuller's  and  Collier's  account  of  this  business  ; 
who  state,  that  on  Dr.  Reynolds'  petition  being 
made,  his  Majesty  answered :  "  I  profess  I 
could  never  yet  see  a  Bible  well  translated  in 
English  ;  but  I  think  that,  of  all,  that  of  Geneva 
is  the  worst."  (e)  This  declaration  the  vicar 
says,  "  can  only  be  supposed  to  mean  that  he 
never  yet  had  seen  an  English  Bible  in  which 
there  were  not  passages  capable  of  being  better 
translated  !  (f)  His  pretext  for  this  perversion  of 
language  is,  that  when  the  king  gave  orders  for 
the  new  translation,  which  he  represents  him  to 
have  done  merely  to  humour  a  poor  empty  shift, 
a  mere  shallow  pretence  (g)  of  the   Church  of 

(a)  These  particulars  are  the  following :  1st.  Gal.  iv.  25, 
TVTroiyet,  wrong  translated  bordereth.  According  to  this, 
Mount  Sina  in  Arabia,  borders  upon  Jerusalem  !  2ndly, 
Ps.  cv.  28,  They  were  not  disobedient  (or  they  rebelled  not,) 
contradictorily  translated,  They  were  not  obedient.  3rdly, 
Ps.cvi.20,  Phineas  executed  judgment,  wrong  translated, 
Phineas  prayed.  See  Fuller's  Ch.  Hist,  B.  x.,  p.  14.  The 
vicar  asserts  that  "  the  passages  at  first  objected  to  (by  the 
non-conformists,  and  which  he  calls  an  empty  shift  and  a 
hollow  pretence,)  have  continued  in  it  (the  existing  version) 
without  alteration,"  p.  81.  Now  the  fact  is,  that  each  of 
them  has  been  altered  according  to  the  suggestion  of  Dr. 
Reynolds  and  his  party,  as  will  be  seen  in  the  present  Eng- 
lish Bible. 

(b)  Neal's  Hist,  of  the  Puritans,  vol.  ii.  p.  53. 

(c)  Strype's  Life  of  A.  B.  Whitgift,  pp.  433,  587. 

(d)  Reply,  p.  80. 

(e)  Fuller.  Eccl.  Hist.,  B.  x.,  p.  14. 

</)  Ibid.,  p.  91.  (g)  Reply,  p.  81. 

16 


England's  enemies,  he  gave  directions  that "  The 
Bishops'  Bible  be  followed,  and  as  little  altered 
as  the  truth  of  the  original  will  permit ;  and  that 
Tyndal's,  &c,  be  used  when  they  agree  better 
with  the  text  than  the  Bishops'."  (A)  And  yet 
what,  else  does  this  signify,  except  that  the 
Bishops'  Bible  is  not  always  conformable  to  the 
truth  of  the  original  1  and  that  the  other  editions 
sometimes  agree  better  with  the  text  than  does 
the  bishops'  ?  Such  is  the  vicar's  ingenuity  in 
refuting  his  own  argument ;  after  which  exhi- 
bition, he  concludes,  with  his  customary  self- 
complacency,  "  I  have  thus  disposed  of  the 
royal  censure  in  all  its  bearings."  (i) 

The  vicar  represents  it  to  be  a  demonstra- 
tive proof  of  the  different  sects  of  non-con- 
formists and  dissenters  subscribing  to  the  purity 
and  excellence  of  the  present  version,  that 
they  have  never  attempted  to  substitute  another 
in  its  place.  But  is  this  the  fact?  Did  not 
the  Grand  Committee  for  Religion,  in  1656, 
when  the  Presbyterians  were  in  power,  appoint 
a  sub-committee,  "  to  confer  with  Dr.  Walton 
and  five  others  about  another  translation  of  the 
Bible  !  and  were  not  many  meetings  held  on 
this  subject  at  secretary  Whitlock's  house  ?"  (A) 
Again,  at  the  Savoy  Conference  in  1661,  did  not 
the  non-conformist  divines  object  to  a  great  num- 
ber of  faulty  translations  of  scriptural  passages 
which  occurred  in  the  liturgy,  and  obtain  that 
they  should  be  amended  ;  (/)  I  need  say  nothing 
by  way  of  answer  to  the  vicar,  in  justification  of 
Sir  Thomas  More's,  bishop  Tunstall's,  and  other 
Catholics'  predictions,  as  to  the  consequences  to 
be  expected  from  the  general  diffusion  of  Tyn- 
dal's and  the  other  Protestant  Bibles  without  an 
expositor,  or  so  much  as  a  commentary  or  note 
upon  them,  since  these  were  visibly  fulfilled  in 
the  sacrilegious  confusion  of  Edward's  reign,  and 
still  more  in  the  fanatic  rebellion  and  regicide 
fury  of  that  of  Charles  I.,  when  not  a  folly  or 
a  crime  took  place  without  chapter  and  verse 
being  quoted  in  its  vindication.  In  short,  the 
Established  Church  of  England,  with  the  vicar 
himself,  has  at  last  taken  just  alarm  at  the 
consequences  to  be  apprehended  for  herself, 
as  well  as  for  the  state,  from  an  unbounded 
and  indiscriminate  diffusion  of  Bibles,  without 
the  Prayer  Book  to  direct  its  meaning.  I  do 
not  find  myself  called  upon  to  make  any  re- 
mark on  the  praises  which  the  twenty-two 
Protestant  writers,  whom  he  quotes,  bestow 
on  their  own  Bible.  The  vicar's  citation  of 
these  twenty-two  witnesses  makes  no  more  for 
his  cause,  than  if  I  were  to  cite  the  two  hundred 
and  fifty-two  prelates  of  the  Council  of  Trent 
who  pronounced  upon  mine. 

Speaking  of  the  last  English  translation  of  the 
Bible,  the  one  now  in  use,  published  by  king 


(A)  P.  91. 

(t)  P.  92. 

(A)  Collier's  Eccl.  Hist.,  P.  ii.,  p.  869. 

(I)  For  example,  in  the  Epistle  of  the  First  Sunday  after 
Epiph.,  Rom.  xii.  1,  the  text  stood  thus :  Be  ye  changed  in 
your  shape.  In  the  Epist.  for  Sunday  before  Easter,  Philip, 
ii.  5,  Christ  was  said  to  be  found  in  his  apparel  as  a  man 
Collier,  P.  ii.,  p.  878. 


118 


VERSION    OF    THE    ENGLISH    BIBLE. 


James  I.,  in  1611,  the  author  of  The  End  of 
Controversy  said :  "  Though  these  new  transla- 
tors have  corrected  many  wilful  errors  of  their 
predecessors,  most  of  which  are  levelled  at  Ca- 
tholic doctrines  and  discipline,  yet  they  have  left 
a  sufficient  number  of  these  behind,  for  which  I 
do  not  find  that  their  advocates  offer  any  ex- 
cuse." Two  of  these  he  specified  as  standing 
in  direct  opposition  to  the  original  text,  as  it  is 
quoted  by  those  advocates,  Dr.  Ryan  and  the 
Rev.  Mr.  Grier.  (a)  On  these  two  points,  one  of 
them  regarding  the  celibacy  of  the  clergy,  the 
other,  communion  under  one  kind,  the  last 
named  gentleman  says  :  "  I  join  issue  with  Dr. 
M."  (b)  I  will  state  each  of  them  briefly,  yet 
clearly.  Our  B.  Saviour  having  condemned 
the  Jewish  practice  of  divorce,  His  disciples  say 
unto  him :  If  the  case  of  a  man  be  so  with  his 
wife,  it  is  not  good  to  marry.  But  he  said 
unto  them:  All  men  receive  not  this  saying; 
in  Greek  :  ov  navxeg  /coqoogi  xov  Xoyov  iovxov. 
Mat.  xix.  2.  In  like  manner  St.  Paul  says,  1  Cor. 
vii.  7 :  /  say  therefore  to  the  unmarried  and 
widows :  it  is  good  for  them  if  they  abide  even 
as  I ;  but  if  they  do  not  contain  let  them 
marry  ;  in  Greek  et  8e  ovx  eyxquxevovxai.  Now 
in  both  these  passages,  the  latter  as  well  as  the 
earlier  Protestant  translators  change  do  not 
into  cannot,  in  excuse  for  the  first  reformers' 
breach  of  their  vowed  celibacy,  (c)  With  re- 
spect to  the  former  of  these  falsifications,  Dr. 
Ryan  derides  it,  and  says  :  "  The  Remish  ver- 
sion agrees  nearly  with  our  own !"  (d)  while 
the  vicar  refers  to  his  former  work  for  a  satis- 
factory proof  that  the  word  cannot  "  is  most 
agreeable  to  the  original,"  (e)  which  says  do  not. 
As  to  the  second  falsification,  the  vicar  says  : 
"  I  have  been  obliged  to  convict  Dr.  M.  of  gross 
ignorance  of  the  Greek,  no  less  than  a  fraudu- 
lent application  of  the  Latin,  and  have  proved 
to  demonstration  that  the  Rhemish  version  of 
this  text,  st  Ss  ovx  eyqarevovxat,  is  erroneous." 
(/)  Now  in  what  does  this  boasted  conviction  of 
my  ignorance,  and  of  the  erroneousness  of  the 
Rhemish  version,  consist  ?     Why  the  vicar  says 

(a)  End  of  Controv.,  Let.  ix.,  p.  72. 

(b)  P.  95. 

(c)  Another  falsification  of  the  same  kind,  which  seems  to 
be  levelled  at  the  tenet  of  free-will, occurs  both  in  the  earlier 
and  later  version  of  Galat.  v.  17.     The  apostle  says  :  You 

DO  NOT  the  things  that  1J0U  would  :  a  av  deXrire  ravra  iroirjre; 

this  the  translators  turn  thus :  So  that  you  cannot  do  the 
things  that  you  would,  contrary  to  the  original  Greek,  the 
Latin  Vulgate,  the  Syriac,  Arias  Montanus,  Erasmus, 
Beza,  Tremellius,  &c.  It  is  extraordinary  that  neither 
the  editor  of  the  Rheims  Testament  nor  Ward  has  pointed 
out  this  corruption. 

(d)  Analysis,  p.  19. 

(c)  Reply,  p.  95.  On  consulting  the  book  and  page  here 
referred  to,  the  only  words  relating  to  the  translation  itself, 
consist  in  a  repetition  of  Ryan's  above-quoted  falsehood, 
namely,  he  says  :  **  The  Rhemish  construction  does  not 
substantially  differ  from  the  Protestant  one."  The  rest  of 
his  long  dissertation  is  made  up  of  his  own  confused  expo- 
sition of  the  scripture  and  the  fathers  on  the  subject  of 
celibacy.     See  Answer  to  Ward,  pp.  33,  34, 35. 

(/)  Ibid.,  p.  95. 


that  eyoxTsvo/jat,  "  is  a  verb  of  the  middle  voice," 
and  that  "  the  Vulgate  reading,  which  agrees 
with  it,  is,  si  vero  se  non  continent,  (g)  that  is 
to  say :  if  they  do  not  contain  themselves  ;" 
therefore,  according  to  the  vicar,  the  passage 
ought  to  be  translated :  if  they  cannot  contain, 
as  in  the  common  Bible  !  What  is  it  that  chi- 
canery and  confidence  will  not  attempt  to  prove ! 
The  other  instance  of  still  subsisting  error  in 
the  latter  translation  of  the  Bible,  as  well  as  in 
the  former,  consists  in  the  false  translation  of 
1  Cor.  xi.  27,  where  St.  Paul  speaking  of  the 
B.  Sacrament,  says  :  Whosoever  shall  eat  this 
bread,  or  drink  the  chalice  of  the  Lord  un- 
worthily, shall  be  guilty  of  the  body  and  of  the 
blood  of  the  Lord:  SIcfxb  og  av  Eodirj  xov  aqxov 
xovxov  rj  ixivrj  xo  noxrjqiov  tow  xvqiov  ava^icog,  svo- 
%o%,  eorat  xov  awfiaxog  xai  ai/naxaq  xov  xvqiov. 
This  text,  which  is  so  decisive  in  favour  of  the 
Catholic  doctrine,  respecting  the  body  and  blood 
of  Christ  being  received  under  either  kind  in  the 
B.  Sacrament,  is,  on  that  account,  falsified  in 
both  translations  of  the  English  Bible,  by  turning 
the  disjunctive  article  or,  into  the  conjunctive 
article  and.  Dr.  Ryan  finding  this  falsification 
(which  Ward  does  not  fail  to  expose)  too  gross 
to  be  defended,  very  prudently  passes  it  by  un- 
answered. The  vicar  had,  in  his  former  work, 
attempted  to  prove  that  r\  and  xcu,  or  and  and, 
are  convertible  articles !  At  present  he  con- 
tents himself  with  relating  a  story  about  Dr. 
Kilbie,  who,  he  says,  hearing  a  certain  clergy- 
man maintain  in  the  pulpit  that  there  are  three 
arguments  against  the  translation  of  a  certain 
word,  in  the  way  it  has  been  translated,  an- 
swered him  that  there  are  thirteen  reasons  why 
it  should  be  translated  as  it  stands  ;  concluding 
thus  :  "  To  Dr.  M.  I  leave  the  application  of 
the  foregoing  anecdote ;  for  it  certainly  affords 
a  useful  hint  to  a  self-confident  critic."  Such 
is  the  issue  of  the  contest  to  which  the  vicai 
challenged  me !  And  such  are  his  reasons 
for  showing  that  the  term  do  not,  should 
be  translated  cannot,  and  why  the  disjunctive 
or,  should  be  changed  into  the  conjunctive 
and.  I  hope  you  will  not  forget  Dr.  Kilbie: 
if  I  do  not  mistake,  the  vicar  will  again  intro- 
duce him  to  you.  In  the  mean  time,  I  remain. 
Yours,  &c, 

J.  M.,  D.  D 


P.  S.— The  vicar's  mode  of  reasoning  on  the 
corruption  in  question  is  of  a  piece  with  that 
of  Luther,  quoted  by  me  in  Letters  to  a  Pre- 
bendary, Let.  v.,  p.  187,  when  being  called  to 
an  account  for  an  undeniable  false  translation 
of  scripture,  he  answered  :  "  Sic  volo,  sic  jubco, 
Luther  usita  vult,  et  ait  se  doctorem  esse  supra 
omnes  doctores  in  toto  Papatu." 


(g)  Answer,  p.  35. 


THE    END. 

N.  B.— For  a  list  of  additional  errors  in  late  additions  of  the  Protestant  Bible,  seo  the  •'  Rock  of  the  Church"— Ed. 


XW&&*5 


I 


